Orissa High Court
*** vs Sub-Registrar on 17 October, 2025
ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
WP(C) No.14398 of 2025
An application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of
India.
***
M/s. Radha Raman Tradecom Private Limited.
... Petitioner.
-VERSUS-
Sub-Registrar, Barchana, Jajpur & Others ... Opposite Parties.
Counsel appeared for the parties:
For the Petitioner : Mr. G. Mukherjee, Senior Advocate Assisted by Mr. S.S. Mohanty, Advocate For the Opposite Parties : Mr. G. Mohanty, Standing Counsel.
(For the Opp. Party Nos.1 to 4) Mr. Himanshu Patnaik, Advocate.
(For Opp. Party No.5) P R E S E N T:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA WP(C) No.14398 of 2025 Page 1 of 11 Date of Hearing : 10.10.2025 :: Date of Judgment : 17.10.2025 J UDGMENT ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.--
1. This writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner-
company praying for quashing the letter No.948 dated 21.12.2024 of Sub-Registrar, Barchana (Opp. Party No.1) & letter No.3744 dated 31.07.2018 of Collector and District Magistrate, Jajpur (Opp. Party No.4) and to direct the Sub- Registrar, Barchana (Opp. Party No.1) and IGR, Odisha, Cuttack (Opp. Party No.2) to make an Entry to the Certificate of Sale dated 20.11.2024 issued by the State Bank of India, Stressed Asset Management Branch-II (Opp. Party No.5) in Book 1 of its Sub-Registrar's office as per Section 89(4) of the Registration Act, 1908.
2. The factual backgrounds of this writ petition, which prompted the petitioner-company for filing of the same is that, one M/s Sabitri Industries Pvt. Ltd. had incurred loans from Opp. Party No. 5 (SBI Stressed Asset Management Branch-II) and due to default in payment of loan dues of the Opp. Party WP(C) No.14398 of 2025 Page 2 of 11 No.5-Bank by the loanee-M/s. Sabitri Industries Pvt. Ltd., the secured assets of the said loan i.e. landed properties indicated specifically in the Para No.4 of the writ petition were put to public auction as per law and the petitioner was the highest bidder of the said auction amongst other participants of that auction sale and paid the auctioned money and purchased the properties indicated in Para No.4 of this writ petition. So, as per law, the Opp. Party No. 5-Bank issued copy of Certificate of Sale on dated 20.11.2024 containing the said properties to the Sub-Registrar, Barchana (Opp. Party No. 1) for making an entry thereof in Book 1 of its office as per section 89(4) of the Registration Act, 1908, but as per letter No.948 dated 21.12.2024, the Sub-Registrar, Barchana (Opp. Party No.1) refused to make entry to the copy of the said sale certificate in Book 1 of its office on the basis of the Letter No.3744 dated 31.07.2018 of the Collector and District Magistrate, Jajpur (Opp. Party No.4), as the Collector and District Magistrate, Jajpur (Opp. Party No.4) had stated in that letter that, the transfer of the properties involved in the copy of the sale certificate has been stopped due to the non-payment of some WP(C) No.14398 of 2025 Page 3 of 11 outstanding dues by the loanee-company i.e. M/s. Sabitri Industries Private Limited. For which, without getting any way, the petitioner being the auction-purchaser of the properties involved in the sale certificate filed this writ petition against the Opp. Parties praying for quashing the letter No.948 dated 21.12.2024 (Annexure-9) of Sub-Registrar, Barchana (Opp. Party No.1) & letter No.3744 dated 31.07.2018 (Annexure-9) of Collector and District Magistrate, Jajpur (Opp. Party No.4) and to direct the Sub-Registrar, Barchana (Opp. Party No.1) and IGR, Odisha, Cuttack (Opp. Party No.2) to make an entry to the properties covered in the copy of sale certificate dated 20.11.2024 issued by the authorized officer of the State Bank of India, Stressed Asset Management Branch-II (Opp. Party No.5) in Book 1 as per Section 89(4) of the Registration Act, 1908.
3. All the Opp. Parties have filed their respective counter affidavits.
The Opp. Party No.5 has supported the case of the petitioner-company.
WP(C) No.14398 of 2025 Page 4 of 11
4. I have already heard from the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for the Opp. Party Nos.1 to 4 and the learned counsel for the Opp. Party No.5.
5. Analyzing the provisions of law envisaged in Section 89(4), 17(2)(xii) of the Registration Act, 1908 along with the provisions of The Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), "The law has already been settled that, the authorized officer who conducts an auction sale shall forward a copy of the certificate of such sale to the local registering authority to enable him to file the same in Book-1 maintained by him in his Registration Office and the said sale certificate does not require registration, because as per Section 17(2)(xii) of the Registration Act, 1908 the said sale certificate is specifically exempted from its mandatory registration. When a copy of the sale certificate is forwarded by the authorized officer to the Sub- Registrar after issuance of sale certificate to the auction purchaser for filing of the same in Book-1 of its local registration office, then, the Sub- Registrar cannot refuse/deny for filing of the same in Book-1 of his office, for no other reason, but as per law, for preservation of a record relating to the said auction sale in the local registration office of the Government. Because, the filing of the copy of the sale certificate in Book-1 of the local registration office becomes the WP(C) No.14398 of 2025 Page 5 of 11 record in the local registration office of the Government."
6. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified by the Apex Court and Hon'ble Courts in the ratio of the following decisions:
I. In a case between B. Arvind Kumar Vs. Government of India & Others reported in (2007) 5 Supreme Court Cases 745 that, a sale certificate issued by the authorized officer to the Sub-Registrar is specifically exempted from mandatory registration under Section 17(2)(xii) of the Registration Act, 1908. (para No.12) II. In a case between Esjaypee Impex Private Limited Vs. Assistant General Manager & Authorized Officer, Canara Bank reported in 2021 (11) SCC 537 that, the mandate of law that flows from a combined reading of Sections 17(2)(xii) and Section 89(4) of the Registration Act respectively is that, the auction purchaser is entitled to receive the original sale certificate and a copy of the same is required to be forwarded to the sub-Registrar for the purpose of filing in Book 1 as per the Registration Act.
Sub-Registrar cannot refuse to enter the details of the sale certificate in Book 1 maintained in terms of Section 89(4) of the Registration Act, 1908 and that process of filing the copy of the sale certificate in Book 1 does not attract stamp duty.
III. In a case between M/s. Eva Agro Feeds Private Limited Vs. State of U.P. & Others reported in 2023 SCC Online All 4073 that, as per the provisions of Section 89(4), 17(2)(xii) & 55 of the Indian Registration Act, the certificate of sale being not compulsorily registerable document as is clear from Section 17(2)(xii) of the Registration Act. For which, when a sale certificate is forwarded by the authorized officer to the Sub-Registrar, then, on getting such sale certificate, the Sub-Registrar shall file the same in Book 1 maintained by him as per law. IV. In a case between Bank of Baroda, represented by its Authorized Officer cum Chief Manager Vs. District Sub-Registrar, Officer and others reported in 2025 SCC Online Ori 653 that, when as per the WP(C) No.14398 of 2025 Page 6 of 11 provisions of Section 89(4) of the Registration Act, 1908, the sale certificate is forwarded by the authorized officer of the Bank to the Sub-Registrar for filing of the same in Book 1 but not for registration in view of the Section 17(2)(xii) of the Registration Act, then, the Sub-Registrar cannot refuse to file the same in Book 1 of his office.
V. In a case between B. Vijaykumar & Others Vs. The Sub-Registrar, Kerla decided in WP(C) No.14650 of 2024 (Kerla) on 19.05.2024 (Para No.24) that, in view of the categorical pronouncements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court taking into account to the provisions of Section 89(4) & 17(2)(xii) of the Registration Act, the Sub-Registrar cannot refuse to enter the details of the sale certificate in Book 1 maintained in terms of the provisions contained in Section 89(4) of the Registration Act, 1908.
VI. In a case between Shanti Devi L. Singh Vs. Tax Recovery Officer & Others reported in AIR 1991 (SC) 1880 that, when as per Section 89(4) of the Registration Act, 1908, the copy of the sale certificate is forwarded to the Sub-Registrar, the Sub-Registrar is obliged under Section 89(4) of the Registration Act to file the same in Book 1 tantamount to registration under the Registration Act. Because, the filing of the same in Book 1 is not a registration, which attracts stamp duty under the relevant Stamp Act, but a Ministerial Act of record keeping. For which, Sub- Registrar cannot refuse to enter the details of sale certificate in Book 1.
VII. In a case between Sri Balaji, represented by Its Partner D. Kavi Kumar Vs. I.G.R., Chennai & Others reported in 2024 (4) Civ.L.J 736 (Madras) that, SARFAESI Act, 2002 will not come under the purview of conveyance, since it is not a transfer inter vivos, it is a transfer by operation of law. VIII. In a case between Bank of Baroda, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, Cuttack represented by its Authorized Officer cum Chief Manager at Sector 7 CDA, Cuttack Vs. District Sub-Registrar, Cuttack & Others reported in 2025 (1) OLR 919 that, when a copy of the Sale Certificate is forwarded to the local registration office, the local sub-registrar cannot refuse/deny for filing of the same in Book No.1 of the Registration office, for no other reason, but as per law, for preservation of a record relating to the concerned auction sale, which would form the WP(C) No.14398 of 2025 Page 7 of 11 record in the local Registration Office of the Government. Sub-Registrar was directed to file the copy of the Sale Certificate in the Book No.1 of its office.
IX. In a case between State of Punjab & Another Vs. M/s. Ferrous Alloy Forgings Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2025 (2) Civ.L.J. 58 (SC) that, property sold by auction sale in favour of highest bidder--Effect--Title of such property passes to auction purchaser under Order XXI, Rule 92. Only Sale Certificate is required to be issued under Order XXI, Rule 94, which is merely formal declaration of his right. By such auction sale, no title is created or extinguished. As such, Section 17(1) is not attracted and registration of Sale Certificate under Section 17(2)(xii) is not required. Auction purchaser has only to send copy of Sale Certificate to Sub-Registrar under Section 89(4) for filing it in Book 1 as per Registration Act. Auction purchaser is not required to pay any stamp duty for the same. (Para Nos.13 to 20).
A notification has already been issued by the Government of Orissa i.e. Government of Odisha, Revenue and Disaster Management Department Letter No.45316/R & DM dated 28.12.2023 superseding the previous Letter No. letter No. 32814/R&DM dated 24.10.2016 and Letter No. 29204/R&DM dated 04.09.2017 forwarding the same to Addl. Chief Secretary to Government to I.G.R. Odisha, Cuttack and all Revenue Divisional Commissioners and Collectors about the entry of Sale Certificate in Book 1 of local registration office as follows:
WP(C) No.14398 of 2025 Page 8 of 11
"the Law Department has been consulted in the matter. The Law Department has advised that the Registering authority is to make necessary entries in Book-1 on production of Sale Certificate issued by the authorurised officer without registration and payment of stamp duty and registration fees thereof."
7. Here in this matter at hand, when the copy of the Sale Certificate dated 20.11.2024 (Annexure-6) was forwarded by the authorized officer of the Bank (Opp. Party No.5) after completion of auction sale to the Sub-Registrar, Barchana (Opp. Party No.1) for making necessary entry of the property details in the said sale certificate (specifically indicated in Para No.4 of this writ petition) in Book 1 of its Office and when as per propositions of law enunciated in the ratio of the aforesaid decisions of the Apex Court and Hon'ble Courts, the Sub- Registrar, Barchana (Opp. Party No.1) was obliged under law to make entry of the property details of that sale certificate in Book 1 of its Office and when as per law, the Sub-Registrar, Barchana (Opp. Party No.1) should not have refused to make entry of the property details of the sale certificate in Book 1, then, at this, juncture, the Letter No.948 dated 21.12.2024 of the Opp. Party No.1 for the refusal of the Opp. Party No.1 to WP(C) No.14398 of 2025 Page 9 of 11 make entry of the property details of the sale certificate in Book 1 on the basis of the Letter No.3744 dated 31.07.2018 of the Collector-Cum-District Magistrate, Jajpur (Opp. Party No.4) cannot be sustainable under law in view of the principles of law enunciated in the ratio of the above decisions.
For which, the said letter No.948 dated 21.12.2024 issued by the Sub-Registrar, Barchana (Opp. Party No.1) to the petitioner vide Annexure-9 is liable to be quashed.
As such, there is merit in this writ petition filed by the petitioner. The same is to be allowed.
8. In result, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed.
9. The letter No.948 dated 21.12.2024 (annexure-9) issued by the Sub-Registrar, Barchana (Opp. Party No.1) to the petitioner is quashed.
10. The Sub-Registrar, Barchana (Opp. Party No.1) is directed for filing of the sale certificate dated 20.11.2024 (Annexure-6) issued by the authorized officer of the Opp. Party No.5-Bank in respect of the property details indicated therein WP(C) No.14398 of 2025 Page 10 of 11 in Book 1 of its Registration Office on the very same date of the production of the certified copy of this Judgment by the petitioner before the Sub-Registrar, Barchana (Opp. Party No.1).
11. As such, this writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of finally.
(ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA) JUDGE High Court of Orissa, Cuttack The 17 .10. 2025// Rati Ranjan Nayak Sr. Stenographer Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RATI RANJAN NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack, India. Date: 22-Oct-2025 18:25:00 WP(C) No.14398 of 2025 Page 11 of 11