← Library
Madras High CourtWP/14682/2016disposed of

E. Krishnan v. The Sub Registrar

2016-04-21Honourable Mr Justice R.Subbiah3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.04.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH W.P.No.14682 of 2016 E. Krishnan ... Petitioner Vs.

The Sub Registrar Tiruporur Kanchipuram District ... Respondent PRAYER : Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to receive and register the settlement deed dated 15.04.2016 presented by the petitioner in respect of the properties in natham S No.1351/ 1B - out of 2.05.0 hectare 304 sq.mts (2,276 Sq.ft) door No.2/74 Uthukattamman Koil Street, Chinnama Nagar, Thaiyur B Village, Tiruporur Taluk , Kanchipuram District before the respondent in accordance with the provisions of Indian Registration Act and also release the same.

For Petitioner :

Mr.N.Suresh For Respondent :

Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

The petitioner has filed this writ petition for issuing a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to receive and register the settlement deed dated 15.04.2016 presented by him in respect of the properties in Natham S No.1351/ 1B - out of 2.05.0 hectare 304 sq.mts (2,276 Sq.ft), Door No.2/74, Uthukattamman Koil Street, Chinnama Nagar, Thaiyur B Village, Tiruporur Taluk , Kanchipuram District before the respondent in accordance with the provisions of Indian Registration Act and also release the same.

(2.1) The case of the petitioner is that he is the absolute owner of the properties mentioned above and they are the Gramanatham house sites.

(2.2) According to him, the gramanatham property is not a property of the Government and it cannot be classified as Government property. A poor villager, who is residing in Gramanatham sites for quite a long time, acquires right, title and interest over the same. The question of grant of patta in Gramanatham property does not arise at all, as the Government has no control or jurisdiction over the said property. (2.3) The petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the property in question for more than six decades in Gramanatham house sites. The petitioner has also paid the property tax.

(2.4) The petitioner executed a Settlement Deed on 15.4.2016, settling the property in favour of his wife and two sons. When the petitioner has approached the respondent for registration of the same, it was returned by the respondent for extraneous consideration. According to him, such documents are being registered continuously by the registration department and the petitioner alone is singled out and discriminated. (2.5) In similar circumstances in respect of a Gramanatham property, this Court in Writ Petition No.16521 of 2015 vide order dated 1.9.2015 directed the concerned Sub Registrar to receive and register the settlement deed executed by the petitioner therein.

(2.6) Even after production of the said order, the respondent has not registered his document, but directed him to produce a similar order from this Court. Hence, having no other option, the petitioner has come up with this writ petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, learned Special Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the respondent.

4. A perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition indicates that the petitioner executed a Settlement Deed dated 15.4.2016 in favour of his wife and two sons, but the said document was not registered. The respondent refused to receive and register the document.

5. When the matter was taken up for consideration, it is brought to my knowledge that in similar circumstances, this Court passed an order in W.P.No.16521 of 2014 dated 1.9.2015 on the following lines:

"2. The law is quite settled that the gramanathamis not a Government poromboke land. The

certificate issued by the V.A.O.shows that house has been constructed over the said land. what the petitioner has conveyed is a settlement by him to his son. The respondent cannot delve much into the title as a mere registration will not give such status.

3. In view of the same, this writ petition is allowed and the respondent is directed to receive and register the document to be produced by the petitioner subject to the payment of requisite stamp duty. No costs."

6. Therefore, in my considered opinion, if the properties mentioned in the schedule of the Settlement Deed dated 15.4.2016 executed by the petitioner are found to be Gramanatham properties, the respondent is duty bound to receive and register the same. Hence, the respondent is directed to receive the document, viz., settlement deed dated 15.04.2016 presented by him in respect of the properties in Natham S No.1351/ 1B - out of 2.05.0 hectare 304 sq.mts (2,276 Sq.ft), Door No.2/74, Uthukattamman Koil Street, Chinnama Nagar, Thaiyur B Village, Tiruporur Taluk , Kanchipuram District and register the same, if the same are found to be Gramanatham properties, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ajr To The Sub Registrar Tiruporur Kanchipuram District +1cc to Mr.N.Suresh, Advocate, S.R.No.25206 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.25042 W.P.No.14682 of 2016 VS(CO) CA(25/04/2016)