Madras High Court
N.Naveen Kaarthik vs The Inspector General Of Registration on 4 July, 2023
Author: G.R.Swaminathan
Bench: G.R.Swaminathan
1 W.P.(MD)NO.18730 OF 2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 04.07.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
W.P.(MD)No.18730 of 2014
N.Naveen Kaarthik ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Inspector General of Registration,
No.120, Santhome High Road,
Pattinapakkam, Chennai – 600 0028.
2. The Sub Registrar,
Sub Registrar's Office,
Vathalagundu,
Dindigul District.
3. N.Rani ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, calling for
the records of the 2nd respondent in document No.3382 of
2014 (Cancellation deed) dated 07.10.2014, quash the same
and grant such other reliefs.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.S.Vamsidhar
For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.SR.A.Ramachandran,
Additional Government Pleader.
For R-3 : No appearance.
***
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/9
2 W.P.(MD)NO.18730 OF 2014
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2.
2. Though the third respondent has been served and her name is also printed in the cause list, she has not chosen to enter appearance.
3. The petitioner is none other than the son of the third respondent. The third respondent had purchased the petition-mentioned property vide sale deed dated 06.02.2008. She settled the said property in favour of the petitioner on 11.07.2014 under the registered document (document No.2336 /2014) on the file of the second respondent. The said document was unilaterally cancelled by the third respondent on 07.10.2014. The second respondent registered the deed of cancellation vide document No.3382 /2014. To nullify the registration of the deed of cancellation, the present writ petition came to be filed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/9 3 W.P.(MD)NO.18730 OF 2014
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterated all the contentions set out in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and called upon this Court and to grant relief as prayed for.
5. The official respondents have not filed any counter affidavit. As rightly noted, the third respondent had not entered appearance through counsel.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner draws my attention to the decision of the Hon'ble Full Bench reported in AIR 2011 Mad 66 (Latif Estate Line India Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Hadeeja Ammal and Ors). The Hon'ble Full Bench has held as follows:-
“ 59. After giving our anxious consideration on the questions raised in the instant case, we come to the following conclusion:
(i) A deed of cancellation of a sale unilaterally executed by the transferor does not create, assign, limit or extinguish any right, title or interest in the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/9 4 W.P.(MD)NO.18730 OF 2014 property and is of no effect. Such a document does not create any encumbrance in the property already transferred. Hence such a deed of cancellation cannot be accepted for registration.
(ii) Once title to the property is vested in the transferee by the sale of the property, it cannot be divested unto the transferrer by execution and registration of a deed of cancellation even with the consent of the parties. The proper course would be to re-convey the property by a deed of conveyance by the transferee in favor of the transferor.
(iii) Where a transfer is effected by way of sale with the condition that title will pass on payment of consideration, and such intention is clear from the recital in the deed, then such instrument or sale can be cancelled by a deed of cancellation with the consent of both the parties on the ground of non-payment of consideration.
The reason is that in such a sale deed, admittedly, the title remained with the transferor.
(iv) In other cases, a complete and absolute https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/9 5 W.P.(MD)NO.18730 OF 2014 sale can be cancelled at the instance of the transferor only by taking recourse to the Civil Court by obtaining a decree of cancellation of sale deed on the ground inter alia of fraud or any other valid reasons.” The aforesaid decision has been relied on by another Full Bench of Madras High Court in the decision reported in 2022 (5) CTC 257 (Sasikala Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer). The Hon'ble Full Bench has held as follows:-
“44. From the discussions and conclusions we have reached above with reference to various provisions of Statutes and precedents, we reiterate the dictum of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Thota Ganga Laxmi and Ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh & Ors., reported in MANU/SC/1267/2010 :
(2010) 15 SCC 207 and the Full Bench of this Court in Latif Estate Line India Ltd., case, reported in MANU/TN/0310/2011 : AIR 2011(Mad) 66 and inclined to follow the judgment of three member Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Veena Singh's case reported in MANU/SC/0615/2022 : (2022) 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/9 6 W.P.(MD)NO.18730 OF 2014 SCC 1 and the judgment of two member Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd., case, reported in MANU/SC/0579/2022 for the following propositions:
(a) A sale deed or a deed of conveyance other than testamentary dispositions which is executed and registered cannot be unilaterally cancelled.
(b) Such unilateral cancellation of sale deed or a deed of conveyance is wholly void and non est and does not operate to execute, assign, limit or extinguish any right, title or interest in the property.
(c) Such unilateral cancellation of sale deed or deed of conveyance cannot be accepted for registration.
(d) The transferee or any one claiming under him or her need not approach the civil Court and a Writ Petition is maintainable to challenge or nullify the registration.
(e) However, an absolute deed of sale or deed https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/9 7 W.P.(MD)NO.18730 OF 2014 of conveyance which is duly executed by the transferrer may be cancelled by the Civil Court at the instance of transferor as contemplated under Section 31 of Specific Relief Act.
(f) As regards gift or settlement deed, a deed of revocation or cancellation is permissible only in a case which fall under Section 126 of Transfer of Property Act, and the Registering Authority can accept the deed of cancellation of gift for registration subject to the conditions specified in para 42 of this judgment.
(g) The legal principles above stated by us cannot be applied to cancellation of Wills or power of Attorney deed which are revocable and not coupled with interest.”
7. The second respondent thus has no jurisdiction to register the deed of unilateral cancellation. The impugned registration is set aside as null and void. This writ petition stands allowed. No costs.
04.07.2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 7/9 8 W.P.(MD)NO.18730 OF 2014 NCS : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No PMU To:
1. The Inspector General of Registration, No.120, Santhome High Road, Pattinapakkam, Chennai – 600 0028.
2. The Sub Registrar, Sub Registrar's Office, Vathalagundu, Dindigul District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 8/9 9 W.P.(MD)NO.18730 OF 2014 G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.
PMU W.P.(MD)No.18730 of 2014 04.07.2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 9/9