A.Velusamy v. The Sub Registrar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 12.08.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN WP.Nos.16850 & 16851/2021 [Video Conferencing] A.Velusamy ... Petitioner in WP.No.16850/2021 K.Thiurmorthi ... Petitioner in WP.No.16851/2021

Versus

The Sub Registrar Office of the Sub Registrar Avalpoonthurai, Erode District.

... Respondent in both WPs Common Prayer : - Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to register the certified copy of the decree passed in OS.No.893/2017 dated 06.09.2019 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Erode.

For Petitioners in both WPs :

Mr.K.Sathish For Respondent in both WPs :

Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan Government Advocate COMMON ORDER (1) Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

(2) These writ petitions have been filed in the nature of a

mandamus directing the respondent/Sub Registrar, Avalpoonthurai, Erode District to register a decree passed in OS.No.893/2017 dated 06.09.2019 by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, at Erode. The said suit had been filed seeking partition and separate possession. After due process, the suit was decreed. As a matter of fact, the parties had been referred to Lok Adalat and thereafter, a compromise had been effected among parties and a decree was passed by the said Court. The petitioners also obtained the decree engrossed in non-judicial stamp papers and thereafter, presented the decree for registration. The respondent appears to have refused to register the decree primarily on the ground of limitation.

Section 23 of the Registration Act, 1908, had come in for interpretation on an earlier occasion before this Court and it had been consistently held that the period of limitation stipulated therein, would not apply for registration of Court decrees lawfully passed. The word decree is found in Section 23, but interpretation of the Courts have made it clear that the Sub Registrar cannot refuse registration on the ground of limitation.

(3) Let me just cite one order, viz., WP.No.9352/2015 dated 04.09.2017 [B.Vijayan Vs. The District Registrar, O/o.the District Registrar, Chennai South, Saidapet, Chennai 600 015 and Another] wherein a learned Single Judge of this Court had directed acceptance of the decree for registration and complete the registration process. In that case, a Check Slip had been issued and the learned Single Judge had set aside the said Check Slip and thereafter, had directed registration.

(4) I would also issue a direction to the respondent herein to receive a copy of the decree in OS.No.893/2017 dated 06.09.2019, thereafter proceed for registration of the same in accordance with the procedure laid down and release a copy of the same to the petitioner herein. It is hoped that the said act would be discharged without any delay by the respondent herein.

(5) The writ petitions stand allowed accordingly. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar // True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar AP

To The Sub Registrar Office of the Sub Registrar Avalpoonthurai, Erode District.

+2ccs to Mr.K.Sathish, Advocate, S.R.No.39891 WP.Nos.16850 & 16851/2021 PMK(CO) CT(03/09/2021)