Kerala High Court
Mr. Barath vs State Of Kerala on 10 March, 2026
1
W.P.(C) No. 8199/2025
2026:KER:22064
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH 2026 / 19TH PHALGUNA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 8199 OF 2025
PETITIONER/S:
1 MR. BARATH, AGED 29 YEARS
S/O. LATE MRS. GEETHA PREMRAJ AND LATE BHASKARAN PREMRAJ APT
BLK - 13, HOLLAND DRIVE# 14-60 SINGAPORE - 1024 HAVING
ADDRESS AT KANICHANKOTTA MANIBHAVAN, MARUTHOOR DESOM,
NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. DULY
REPRESENTED BY POA HOLDER MRS. SREEDEVI N A W/O. LATE
SUGATHAN B, RESIDING AT 56/610, ST. JOHN'S ROAD, NEAR YATCH
CLUB, THEVARA, THEVARA P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN -
682013
2 MRS. PREMRAJ INDIRA, AGED 30 YEARS
D/O. MRS. LATE GEETHA PREMRAJ AND LATE MR. BHASKARAN APT BLK
- 13, HOLLAND DRIVE# 14-60 SINGAPORE - 1024 HAVING ADDRESS
AT KANICHANKOTTA MANIBHAVAN, MARUTHOOR DESOM, NEYYATTINKARA
TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, DULY REPRESENTED BY POA
HOLDER MRS. SREEDEVI N A W/O. LATE SUGATHAN B, RESIDING AT
56/610, ST. JOHN'S ROAD, NEAR YATCH CLUB, THEVARA, THEVARA
P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRCT, PIN - 682013
BY SMT.S.LAKSHMY
SMT.MERIN MONACHAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,, PIN - 695001
2 DISTRICT REGISTRAR, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, FIRST
FLOOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, S STREET RD, FORT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA PIN - 695023
3 THE INSPECTOR GENERAL,
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL, REPRESENTED BY REGISTRATION
2
W.P.(C) No. 8199/2025
2026:KER:22064
INSPECTOR GENERAL OFFICE ,VANCHIYOOR P.O.
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695035
4 SUB REGISTRAR
SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, NEYYATTINKARA KATTAKKADA RD,
ALUMMOODU, NEYYATTINKARA, KERALA, PIN - 695121
5 THE GENERAL MANAGER
FOREIGN EXCHANGE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, RESERVE BANK OF
INDIA, KALOOR KOCHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682017
6 ADDL.R6. THE SUB REGISTRAR,
SUB - REGISTRY OFFICE, PERUMKIDAVILA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN
695 124 [ADDL.R6 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 25/2/2026
IN I.A.1/2026 IN WP(C)8199/2025].
BY SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI
OTHER PRESENT:
GP SRI. K.M FAISAL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.2.2026,
THE COURT ON 10.3.2026 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
W.P.(C) No. 8199/2025
2026:KER:22064
JUDGMENT
(Dated this the 10th day of March 2026) Petitioners' mother, late Geetha Premraj @ Geetha inherited property having an extent 56.2266 cents in Sy.No.582/5 in Perumkadavila village, Neyyattinkara Taluk, Thiruvananthapuram with right of way over the pathway on the western side with all easement and other rights appurtenant thereto as per partition deed No.429/1987 of SRO Neyyattinkara. Petitioners' mother was an Indian citizen at the time of execution of partition deed and held an Indian passport. Ext.P2 is the copy of partition deed and Ext.P3 is photocopy of passport No.C870236. Petitioners' parents were settled in Singapore and petitioners are born in Singapore. Ext.Nos.P7 and P8 are the passports issued to the petitioners by the Republic of Singapore. They are not having the overseas citizen of India Card and is not in possession of any identification issued by the Government of 4 W.P.(C) No. 8199/2025 2026:KER:22064 India.
2. Petitioners' father Mr Bhaskaran Premraj passed away on 10.10.2010 leaving behind the petitioners' mother late Geetha Premraj and the petitioners. Petitioners' mother, while on a visit to India, passed away on 28.5.2016 at Thiruvananthpauram and Ext.P10 is the death certificate. Petitioners approached the Family court of Republic of Singapore for granting letters of administration and the same is issued as per Ext.P11 on 11.7.2016. Thus, upon the demise of petitioners' mother, the petitioners have inherited the property having an extent of 56.2266 cents. Petitioners have effected mutation and remitted land tax evidenced by Ext.P12. The petitioners do not have an intention to return to India and are permanently residing in Singapore. Therefore, they have appointed their mother's sister as their power of attorney to dispose of the property, which they have 5 W.P.(C) No. 8199/2025 2026:KER:22064 inherited in India, to their cousins one Mr. Manu Sugathan and Mr. Pappu S, who are citizens as well as permanent residents of India.
3. While attempting for a slot for registration of the sale deed and for obtaining e-stamp, they could not complete the process as the site required a valid identify proof issued by the Government of India and on enquiry with the 4th respondent, it was revealed that since they are neither OCI card holders and do not possess any Indian identification proofs, they cannot transfer the property.
4. A representation was preferred by the petitioners through the power of attorney holder to the 1st respondent as Ext.P13. But the same was replied to by Ext.P14 stating that at the time of registration, as mandated under Rule 72A of the Registration Rules, they have to produce the documents 6 W.P.(C) No. 8199/2025 2026:KER:22064 mentioned therein. Moreover, they will have to pay stamp duty for the power of attorney as the same is a compulsory registerable document under Section 17(g) of the Registration Act. It is also clarified that they will have to comply with the directions issued by Central Government as well as the RBI in this regard. Petitioners challenge Ext.P14 in this Writ Petition as it is illegal and against the guidelines issued by the RBI and the Government of India and prayed for the following reliefs:
i. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records leading to Exhibit P14 order of the third respondent and quash the same.
ii. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the fourth respondent to accept the sale deed executed by the petitioners in respect of 20.60 Ares in Survey No. 582/5, situated in Perumkadavila Thiruvananthapuram District and register the same.
iii. To dispense with the production of the translation of vernacular documents.
iv. Issue such other appropriate writ order or direction that may be deemed fit to be granted in the facts and 7 W.P.(C) No. 8199/2025 2026:KER:22064 circumstances of the case.
5. Heard the counsel for petitioner Smt.S Lakshmy, the Government Pleader Shri K M Faisal and Shri Millu Dandapani counsel appearing for the 5th respondent.
6. Counsel for the petitioners submits that as per section 6(5) of The Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA), 1999 (FEMA Act), a person residing outside India can transfer an immovable property situated in India, if such property was acquired by such person, when he was a resident of India or where such properties are inherited from any person who was resident in India. According to the counsel, petitioners' mother obtained the property when she was a resident of India and while holding an Indian passport by way of a family partition. So, as per Regulation 4(c) of the Foreign Exchange Management (Acquisition and Transfer of Immovable Property 8 W.P.(C) No. 8199/2025 2026:KER:22064 in India) Regulations, 2000 (FEMA - 2000), a person of Indian origin resident outside India may acquire any immovable property in India by way of inheritance from a person resident outside India who had acquired such property in accordance with the provisions of foreign exchange law in force at the time of acquisition by him or the provisions of these Regulations or from a person resident in India. The petitioners have acquired the property from a person who was an Indian national. As per Regulation 4(b) of the FEMA - 2000, a person of Indian origin resident outside India, may acquire any immovable property in India, other than agricultural land/farm house/plantation property by way of gift from a person resident in India or from a person resident outside India who is a citizen of India or from a person of Indian origin resident outside India.
7. The objection raised in Ext.P14 is that as per Rule 9 W.P.(C) No. 8199/2025 2026:KER:22064 72A of the Rules, only those documents stated therein can be used for identification of parties for execution of power of attorney. The documents stated therein are Electoral identity card or Passport or Driving License or Permanent Account Number Card or Ration Card or Identity card issued by the Government or any authority controlled by the Government. Admittedly the petitioners are citizens of Singapore and does not have having an OCI card. Therefore, they cannot produce any documents stated in Rule 72A. Whether a foreign national who is not having any documents as stated in Rule 72A can effect registration with a document proving his identity not issued by the Government of India has been dealt with by this court in Manu C Jacob v. The Sub Registrar [2019 (2) KLT 884], wherein it was held as follows:
"4. The very purport of Rule 72A has to be understood in the light of Rule 72. Rule 72 states about identifying 10 W.P.(C) No. 8199/2025 2026:KER:22064 parties appearing before the Registering Officer. It states that it should be proved with trustworthy evidence which may be available. The Rule 72A further illustrates the manner of enquiry to be conducted by the Registering Officer. Rule 72A states that the Registering Officer shall require the parties appearing before him to produce electoral identity card, ration card and such other cards as referred therein issued by the Government or any authority controlled by Government to satisfy himself as to their identity. Therefore, Rule 72A has to be understood in the light of Rule 72. It cannot be understood as an independent provision de hors Rule 72. Rule 72A as seen from the provision is only a procedural aspect of satisfying Rule 72. Therefore, what is important is the satisfaction of the Registering Officer in regard to identification of the parties. If identification of the parties can be relied upon with trustworthy evidence which is made available before the Registering Officer, that can be relied upon by the Registering Officer. A person of foreign nationality cannot have any such documents as referred under Rule 72A. The Rule 72A can be only a guideline so far as Rule 72 is concerned. In the light of Rule 72, it is possible for a foreign national to produce any trustworthy evidence that may be available with him to register such documents. The Rule 72A is only to be understood as a provision that would make Rule 72 workable as far as a person who will be able to produce such documents as referred therein. A foreign national would not be in a position to produce any such documents as referred under Rule 72A.11 W.P.(C) No. 8199/2025
2026:KER:22064 Therefore, I am of the view that in the light of Rule 72, if the petitioner produces any such trustworthy document like attested copy of the passport that would be sufficient for the purpose of registering the power of attorney. It is not necessary to have a personal presence of the executer of the power of attorney in the light of judgment of this Court in W.P.(C) No.23710/2018. Therefore, the Registering Authority is directed to permit the petitioner to register the power of attorney without insisting production of any of documents as referred under Rule 72A and accepting the Singapore passport as identification proof. The Registering Authority shall also not insist the presence of the foreign national for the purpose of registering the power of attorney."
As far as power of attorney is concerned, the counsel submits that they will execute a valid power of attorney in Singapore attested by the competent authority and will get adjudicated in India for the purpose of registration of sale by paying the requisite stamp. This issue is already covered by this court Cheryl Ann Joy v. Sub Registrar [2018 (3) KLT 806].
8. Counsel for the 5th respondent submits that the 12 W.P.(C) No. 8199/2025 2026:KER:22064 petitioners can execute a document in view of the judgments mentioned above.
Therefore, in view of Rule 72A, if the petitioners produce any trustworthy documents like original Passport or the attested copy of the Passport, that would be sufficient for the compliance of Rule 72A for the registration of power of attorney. It is not necessary to have the personal presence of the executor of power of attorney. The Registering authority is directed to permit the petitioners to register the power of attorney without insisting production of any documents as referred under Rule 72A and accepting the Singapore Passport as identification proof. The Registering authority also shall not insist the presence of the foreign national for the purpose of registering the power of attorney.
The Registering authority shall accept the sale deed 13 W.P.(C) No. 8199/2025 2026:KER:22064 executed by the petitioners in respect of 20.60 Ares in Survey No.582/5, situated in Perumkadavila village, Neyyattinkara Taluk, Thiruvananthapuram district and register the same, on the basis of the new power of attorney executed and adjudicated and if the other conditions satisfy, in accordance with law, within a period of two weeks from the date of production of the sale deed with relevant records. Ext.P14 order of the Registration Inspector General dated 22.10.2024, in the light of the declaration made above, stands quashed.
In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed as above.
Sd/-
BASANT BALAJI JUDGE dl/ 14 W.P.(C) No. 8199/2025 2026:KER:22064 APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 8199 OF 2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P 1 TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY EXECUTED ON 24.10.2019 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONERS IN FAVOUR OF MRS. SREEDEVI N A Exhibit P 2 TRUE COPY OF PARTITION DEED NO. 429/1987, SRO NEYYATTINKARA ALONG WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION IS PRODUCED Exhibit P 3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF PASSPORT BEARING NO. C870236. MOTHER OF 1ST PETITIONER.
Exhibit P 4 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF MARRIAGE NO. 016272 DATED 25.10.1988 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF MARRIAGES, REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE Exhibit P 5 TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATION OF REGISTRATION OF BIRTH OF SECOND PETITIONER BEARING NO. S8936890A DATED 30.10.1989 ISSUED BY THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE Exhibit P 6 TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATION OF REGISTRATION OF BIRTH OF FIRST PETITIONER BEARING NO. S9042680Z DATED 17.11.1990 ISSUED BY THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE Exhibit P 7 TRUE COPY OF PASSPORT NO. K1930932E ISSUED BY REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE TO SECOND PETITIONER Exhibit P 8 TRUE COPY OF THE FRONT PAGE OF PASSPORT NOE5929386K ISSUED BY REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE TO FIRST PETITIONE Exhibit P 9 TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF DEATH NO.
131960D ISSUED BY THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE DATED 11.10.2010 Exhibit P 10 TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF DEATH NO. D0090167- 1605294 ISSUED BY THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION DATED 31.05.2016 Exhibit P 11 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT AND LETTER OF ADMINISTRATION ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE FAMILY JUSTICE COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE IN CASE NO. FC/P 2560/2016 DATED 24.06.2016 Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT NO.
KL01042209095/2022 DATED 18.06.2022 ISSUED BY VILLAGE OFFICER, PERUMKADAVILA Exhibit P 13 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS' THROUGH THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MRS. SREEDEVI N A BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED NIL.
Exhibit P 14 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. IGR/2615/2024-RR9 DATED 22.10.2024 15 W.P.(C) No. 8199/2025 2026:KER:22064 Exhibit P 15 . TRUE COPY OF MASTER CIRCULAR NO. 4/2014-15 ISSUED BY RBI DATED 01.07.2014 Exhibit P 16 TRUE COPY OF THE PRESS RELEASE NO. F NO.
33/28/EM/2007 DATED 30.07.2014 ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE Exhibit P 17 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO D.O.NO 33/28/EM-2007 ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AFFAIRS DATED 11.08.2014 Exhibit P 18 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO TAX-J2/80/2022-TAX DATED 27.07.2022 ISSUED BY THE TAXES (J) DEPARTMENT Exhibit P 19 TRUE COPY OF FILE NO IGR.1290/2022-RR9 DATED 15.08.2022 Exhibit P 20 . TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION NO.FEMA 21 /2000-RB DATED 3RD MAY 2000 ISSUED BY THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA Exhibit P 21 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT ISSUED BY THIS COURT IN WPC 12015/2010 DATED 22.06.2010 Exhibit P 22 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT ISSUED BY THIS COURT IN WPC 38450/2015 DATED 11.03.2016 Exhibit P 23 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT ISSUED BY THIS COURT IN WPC 22367/2023 DATED 02.08.2023