S. Ganesan v. The Inspector General Of Registration
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 24.10.2024 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR S.Ganesan ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Santhome, Chennai.
2.The District Registrar-Admin, Office of the District Registrar, Karur.
3.The Sub Registrar-Joint No.II, Sub Registrar Office, Karur, Karur District.
... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned refusal check slip of the 3rd respondent made in Refusal Number:RFL/Karur Joint II/83/2024, dated 23.09.2024 and quash the same as illegal and consequently, to direct the 3rd respondent to register and release the sale deed dated 23.09.2024 forthwith executed by the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.S.I.Muthiah For Respondents : Mr.C.Satheesh, Government Advocate 1/4
ORDER
By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
2.It is the grievance of the petitioner that when he presented the sale deed dated 23.09.2024, which is executed by him in favour of one M.Velusamy in respect of the property in S.Nos.250/4A & 250/4C to an extent of 22 and 57 cents respectively situated at Minnaampalli Village, Manmangalam Taluk, Karur District, for registration, the 3rd respondent, vide refusal check slip dated 23.09.2024, has refused the same, stating that O.S.No.1 of 2023 is pending on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Karur in respect of the property in question. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition. 3.At the outset, this Court is of the view that mere pendency of the suit will not be a bar for registering the document. Registration is always subject to the result of the suit.
Mere registration will not give any absolute right to the parties concerned and the right of the parties will be only based on the rights declared in the civil suit. The issue raised in this Writ Petition is no longer res-integra, in view of the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Subramani vs. the Sub Registrar and others [WP.No.
26.04.2024], in which it has been held as follows: "....j. The other ground on which refusal is also made casually is citing the pendency of the suit. The said issue is also elaborately dealt by the Division Bench of this Court in N.Ramayee's case, wherein, in paragraph 28, it is held as follows:
28. It is also pertinent to note that even if transfer is made during a pending suit, such transfer is not void but is subject to the result of the suit. Section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act, deals with fraudulent transfer. Even such fraudulent transfer is made with intent to defeat or delay the creditors of the transferor shall be voidable at the option of any creditor so defeated or delayed. Even in such cases the rights of transferee in good faith and for consideration is protected."
Therefore, mere citing the pendency of the suit also the document cannot be registered. "
4.In such view of the matter, the refusal made by the 3rd respondent, citing the pendency of the suit, cannot be sustained in the eye of law. Therefore, the same is liable to be quashed, accordingly, it is quashed. This Writ Petition is allowed with a direction to the 3rd respondent to register the document presented by the petitioner, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. 24.10.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Yuva 3/4
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J Yuva To 1.The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Santhome, Chennai.
2.The District Registrar-Admin, Office of the District Registrar, Karur.
3.The Sub Registrar-Joint No.II, Sub Registrar Office, Karur, Karur District.
24.10.2024 4/4