Madras High Court
J.Ramanathan vs The Sub Registrar on 24 February, 2022
Author: Abdul Quddhose
Bench: Abdul Quddhose
W.P.(MD)No.3538 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 24.02.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
W.P.(MD)No.3538 of 2022
and
W.M.P.(MD)No.3093 of 2022
J.Ramanathan ... Petitioner
Vs.
The Sub Registrar,
Office of Sub Registrar,
Devakottai,
Sivagangai District. ... Respondent
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for
the records relating to the impugned refusal check slip issued by
the respondent herein in Refusal Number: RFL/Devakottai/12/2022
dated 16.02.2022 quash the same and consequently direct the
respondent herein to register the sale deed dated 16.02.2022
presented by the petitioner without insisting production of original
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.3538 of 2022
title documents in view of pendency of DRP No.46 of 2021 in
O.S.No.23 of 2005 on the file of Sub Court, Devakottai.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Srinivasa Raghavan
For Respondent : Mr.S.Shanmugavel
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
*********** This writ petition has been filed challenging the refusal check slip dated 16.02.2022 issued by the respondent refusing registration of the sale deed executed by the petitioner in favour of his purchaser one Dr.Amutha, on the ground that the petitioner has not produced the original parent documents. The parent document is a registered sale deed dated 26.03.1987 registered as Document No.573 of 1987. The petitioner has produced the certified copy of the said parent document at the time of registration to the respondent. But under the impugned refusal check slip, the respondent has refused registration on the ground that the petitioner has not produced the original parent document dated 26.03.1987.
2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.3538 of 2022
2.Heard Mr.S.Srinivasa Raghavan, learned Counsel for the writ petitioner and Mr.S.Shanmugavel, learned Additional Government Pleader who accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.
3.Admittedly, the sale deed dated 26.03.1987, which is a parent title deed, is a registered document and therefore, it is a public document. Being a public document, that too registered with the very same Sub-Registrar's office, this Court is of the considered view that refusal to take cognizance of the said public document by the respondent is erroneous. The respondent has mechanically refused to register the sale deed presented by the petitioner for registration without applying his mind to the fact that the petitioner has produced a certified copy of the sale deed dated 18.03.2009, which is a parent title deed and is a public document.
4.The issue involved in this writ petition has been considered by another learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Sivanadiyan Vs. The Sub Registrar, Pudukottai, reported in 2021 (2) CTC 526. In similar circumstances, this Court held that 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.3538 of 2022 production of original title deeds is not mandatory and the registering authority is not empowered to insist for production of original documents [parent documents] in the absence of specific provision under the Registration Act. The learned Single Judge has held that the circular issued by the Inspector General of Registration, Chennai, cannot have legal sanctity unless the power of issuance of such circular is authorised under the provisions of the Act.
5.In the case on hand also, the Registration Act does not empower the registering authority to refuse registration just because the petitioner has not produced the original title deed [parent document], though he has produced the certified copy of the same. This Court is in agreement with the view taken by the learned Single Judge in the aforementioned ratio.
6.Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that by total non-application of mind, the impugned refusal check slip has been issued by the respondent and accordingly, the impugned refusal check slip dated 16.02.2022 issued by the respondent is quashed. The respondent is directed to admit the sale deed dated 16.02.2022 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.3538 of 2022 presented by the petitioner for registration and register the said document if it is otherwise in order within a period of two [2] weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7.Accordingly, this writ petition stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
24.02.2022
Index : Yes / No
Internet: Yes / No
MR
Note: Issue a copy of this order on 28.02.2022. NOTE: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To The Sub Registrar, Office of Sub Registrar, Devakottai, 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.3538 of 2022 Sivagangai District.
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
MR ORDER MADE IN W.P.(MD)No.3538 of 2022 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.3538 of 2022 24.02.2022 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis