A.N.Boopathi v. The Inspector General Of Registration

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29.04.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH A.N.Boopathi S/o.Natarajan Petitioner Vs

1. The Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome High Road, Chennai 28.

2.The Sub Registrar, Office of Sub Registrar, Annur, Annur.

3.The Executive Officer Moppiripalayam Village Panchayat, Moppiripalayam, Coimbatore.

4.Lakshmi Alias Shanthi W/o Subbagounder Ganapathy Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent vide letter dated 18.03.2025 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and non-est in law and consequently direct the 2nd to respondent to register the gift deed dated 17.03.2025 and release the same within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.B.Vijay for Mr.M.A.Arshad 1/4

For Respondents : Mr.R.Sasikumar, Government Advocate [R1 & R2] Mr.V.Ramesh, Government Advocate [R3] *****

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned communication of the second respondent dated 18.03.2025 and for a consequential direction to the second respondent to register the gift deed dated 17.03.2025.

2. Heard Mr.B.Vijay, learned counsel for petitioner, Mr.R.Sasikumar, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.V.Ramesh, learned Government Advocate appearing for third respondent.

3. The refusal check slip has been issued by the second respondent mainly on the ground that a protest has been made by the adjacent land owner to the effect that the property involves a common pathway.

4. In the considered view of this Court, pursuant to the 2/4

judgment of the Apex Court in K.Gopi v. Sub-Registrar and others [2025 (2) CTC 777], the second respondent cannot enter into a title dispute. The second respondent can refuse registration only on the limited provisions provided under the Registration Act. The issue in hand is not covered by those provisions. Hence, the second respondent has to necessarily register the document, if it is otherwise in order.

5. It is made clear that mere registration of a document will not create any new right and the person can only convey such right which he possesses. With this caveat, this Court is inclined to issue necessary direction to the second respondent.

6. In the light of the above discussion, the impugned communication of the second respondent dated 18.03.2025 is hereby quashed and there shall be a direction to the second respondent to register the gift deed dated 17.03.2025, if it is otherwise in order. N.ANAND VENKATESH, J gm 3/4

This writ petition is allowed with the above direction. No costs. 29.04.2025 Index: Yes/no Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order gm To

1. The Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome High Road, Chennai 28.

2.The Sub Registrar, Office of Sub Registrar, Annur, Annur.

3.The Executive Officer Moppiripalayam Village Panchayat, Moppiripalayam, Coimbatore.

4/4