R.Balaji v. The District Registrar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.10.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI R.Balaji .. Petitioner
Versus
1.The District Registrar Registration Department Krishnagiri - 635 001 2.The Sub Registrar Registration Department Kelamangalam - 635 113 .. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 2nd respondent in Refusal checkslip bearing No. RFL/ Kelamangalam/ 17/ 2022 dated 6.09.2022 and to quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to register the Sale Deed dated 5.09.2022 presented by the petitioner for Registration in respect of property measuring an extent of 1513 sq.ft comprised in S.No.310/1 and bearing Plot No.32 in "G Square Pristine Layout (DTCP Application No. 2/2022 RERA Application No. TN/ 30/ Layout/ 0329/ 2022)" in Achettipalli Village, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District within the Registration sub district of Kelamangalam Registration district of Krishnagiri. For Petitioner :Mr.M.V.Seshachari For Respondents :Mr.C.Kathiravan Special Government Pleader
ORDER
1/6
This writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in Refusal checkslip bearing No. RFL/ Kelamangalam/ 17/ 2022 dated 6.09.2022, quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to register the Sale Deed dated 5.09.2022 presented by the petitioner for Registration in respect of property measuring an extent of 1513 sq.ft comprised in S.No.310/1 and bearing Plot No.32 in "G Square Pristine Layout (DTCP Application No. 2/2022 RERA Application No. TN/ 30/ Layout/ 0329/ 2022)" in Achettipalli Village, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District within the Registration sub district of Kelamangalam Registration district of Krishnagiri.
2. According to the petitioner, he purchased a property from NCL Homes Limted, M/s.NCL Build Tek Limited and NCL Green Habitat Private Limited by virtue of a Sale Deed dated 05.09.2022 on the file of the second respondent. When the same was presented before the respondent, the respondent refused to register the same on the ground that there is a protest petition submitted by G Square Realtors concerning registration of property measuring an extent of 30.55 cents. Challenging the same, this writ petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that unless there is a 2/6
restraining order from the competent Civil Court or under Sec. 22A of the Act, the documents cannot be refused to register by the Sub-Registrar. Hence, prays to allow this writ petition.
4. Heard both sides and perused the materials placed on record. The facts of the present case are not disputed. Admittedly, the sale deed presented by the petitioner was rejected by the respondent on the sole ground that there is a protest petition submitted by one G Square Realtors. However, on perusal of the case file, it would indictate that there is no order from the competent civil court or under Section 22A of the Act restraining the registration of the documents which, this Court is of the view that in the absence of such restraining order, the Sub-Registrar is duty bound to register the document. The issue involved herein is no longer res integra. The question as to whether in the absence of any refraining order, the Sub-Registrar is bound to register the presented document.
This Court in the case of Vadamugam Vellode Nalukarai Nattu Goundergal Sangam Vs. The Inspector General of Registration and others reported in 2021 1 CTC 535 has passed the following directions: "... 10. The 5th respondent has approached the Civil Court and he has filed O.S.No.
the suit properties. It is also seen that the 5th respondent has filed yet another suit in OS. No. 58of 2017 in which she has claimed for the relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants to alienate the suit properties. In both the suits, there is no order passed by the Competent Civil Court injuncting from dealing with the suit properties. What the 5th respondent was not able to achieve before the Civil Court is now sought to be achieved through the 3rd respondent by virtue of a letter given before this Court dated 21.02.2020. The 3rd respondent is a statutory authority, who has to strictly perform his function in accordance with law. This Court exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can never prevent a statutory authority from performing his function.
Therefrore, unless and otherwise a competent Civil Court passes any interim order restraining the alienation of the property, the 3rd respondent has to entertain the documents and register the same, if it is otherwise in order. Ultimately, even if the suit is decreed, the transaction will be subject to the rule of lis pendens. That is exactly why Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, provides a solution for transactions that takes place during the pendency of the suit.
11.In view of the above discussion, the impugned letter of the 3rd respondent dated 21.02.2020 is hereby quashed and the 3rd respondent is directed to entertainthe documents submitted for registration and register the same, if it is otherwise in order. It goes without saying that the necessary stamp duty and registration fee will be paid at the time of submitting the document for registration."
5. In view of the above decision, the impugned letter of the second respondent dated 06.09.2022 is hereby quashed and the second respondent is directed to entertain the documents submitted for registration and register the 4/6
same, if it is otherwise in order. It goes without saying that the necessary stamp duty and registration fee will be paid at the time of submitting the document for registration.
6. Accordingly, this writ petition stands allowed. No costs. 26.10.2022 dhk Internet:Yes/No To 1.The District Registrar Registration Department Krishnagiri - 635 001 2.The Sub Registrar Registration Department Kelamangalam - 635 113 M.DHANDAPANI, J.
5/6
dhk 26.10.2022 6/6