P. Arjunan vs The Sub Registrar-Joint III

T.S. Sivagnanam, J.—By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

The petitioner has filed the above writ petition, to direct the respondent to register the sale deed dated 10.06.2008, presented for registration

with respect to the 21 cents of land out of the larger extent of 1.26 acres in Survey No. 196/5 in Kambarasanpettai Village, Srirangam Taluk,

Tiruchirapalli Registration District.

In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition the petitioner has elaborately narrated as regards the title of the petitioner as to how he is

entitled to the property absolutely. According to the petitioner, after paying sale consideration, the petitioner along with the power of attorney

holder of the vendor went to the respondent for presenting the sale deed for registration, the respondent though had received the sale deed refused

to register the same and he was giving vague reasons and did not issue any written orders. Though a request was made on 12.06.2008 under the

Right to Information Act, demanding the reason for non registration, no information was furnished. Thereafter, when the petitioner perused the

receipt which was issued for remittance of registration fee, there was an endorsement stating that it has to be verified that whether the land in

question belongs to the temple. It is subsequently, the petitioner had made his verification and came to know that Pitchumani Iyengar claiming

himself to be the trustee of the temple has informed the respondent orally not to register any sale deed in respect of S. No. 196/5 and other

adjoining survey numbers. But however, no documents have been filed by the said person before the respondent to prove his claim. Therefore,

learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent is wholly unsustainable.

Per contra, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondent would submit that if the property in question belongs to temple, then, unless

no objection certificate is obtained from the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board, the same cannot be accepted for registration. In

reply to the said submission, learned Counsel for the petitioner would state that there is no document to prove that the property in question belongs

to any temple which lies a temple under the control of the Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment Department.

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondent and perused the materials available

on record.

The question which has come up for consideration in this writ petition is no longer res integra, the Division Bench of this Court in 2008 (7) MLJ

1048 (Thiyagavalli Panchayathai Serntha Nochikkadu Grama Vivasayigal Pathukappu Mattrum Makkal Pothunala Sangam, rep. by its Secretary,

Nochikkadu v. Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chennai and Ors.) was considering the validity of the Government order declaring large

extent of land to be acquired for establishment of a Thermal Power Station by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board. The Division Bench of this Court

was examining the grievance of the petitioner whose sale agreement when presented for registration was refused to be registration by the

concerned Sub Registrar by referring to a Government order stating that the lands in the two villages have been conveyed to M/s. Cuddalore

Power Co., Ltd., and that only documents in favour of said company could be registered. The Division Bench of this Court after elaborately

considering the provisions of the Registration Act, held as follows:

Taking note of the categorical stand of the third respondent in the impugned proceedings, we are at a loss to understand as to how and under

what provision of law such a prohibition came to be imposed by the respondents restraining any individual land owners in the above two villages

from transferring their lands either by way of sale or by any other mode to any third party other than ""Cuddalore Power Company Limited"" and

refuse to register such documents"".

12....

13....

That apart, there is no other provision under which the State Government or the respondents herein can validly issue any directions refusing to

register any document for which registration is permissible under the provision of the said Act. If that be so, it is shocking to note as to under what

provision of law or any other authority, the second respondent issued such directions directing the third respondent not to register any sale deed in

the villages of Thiyagavalli and Kudikkadu except in favour of ""Cuddalore Power Company Ltd."" Any such directions issued by the second

respondent and the impugned proceedings of the third respondent based on such a directive of the second respondent cleanly infringes the

constitutional right of any land owner as a citizen of this country. In such circumstances, the impugned proceedings are wholly devoid of merits and

are liable to be set aside.

This Court in R. Sreedhar v. Registering Officer (District Registrar), Office of the Sub Registrar, Chennai and Anr. reported in 2008 (1) MLJ

342 was considering a prayer some what similar to the present writ petition for registering the sale deed. After taking into consideration the factual

and legal aspects, this Court held that since Section 22A of the Registration Act has been declared as ultra vires, there is no power on the part of

the Registering Authority either to retain a document or defer the document for registration especially when the case does not apply to any of the

incidents mentioned in Rule 162 of the Registration Rules.

Therefore, in view of the law laid down by this Court in the earlier decision which has been based on the various decisions of the Hon''ble

Supreme Court, the respondent has no jurisdiction to refuse to register the document which lies for the reasons stated in the registration fee receipt.

In view of the above, there shall be a direction to the respondent to register and release the document with respect to the 21 cents of land out of

the larger extent of 1.26 acres in Survey No. 196/5 in Kambarasanpettai Village, Srirangam Taluk, Tiruchirapalli Registration District presented by

the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, M.P.(MD) No. 1 of 2008 is closed.