K.Murugesan v. The District Registrar

J U D G M E N T (Judgment of the Court delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.) The intra Court appeal on hand has been instituted challenging the order dated 11.10.2023 in W.P.No.28358 of 2023. The writ petitioner is the appellant before us, who instituted a writ of mandamus directing the District Registrar, Namakkal to conduct an enquiry based on the representation submitted by the writ petitioner/appellant on 15.05.2023, to cancel the Document No.7916 of 2022, on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Rasipuram, Namakkal District.

¶2Since, the writ petition was dismissed on technicalities, the present writ appeal has been filed by the appellant/writ petitioner. Page No.2 of 10

¶3We have perused a copy of the representation submitted by the writ petitioner to the District Registrar dated 15.05.2023. The appellant states that a fraudulent document was registered vide Document No.7916 of 2022 dated 06.12.2022 on the file of the 3rd respondent. Thus, the appellant has filed a complaint under Section 77-A of the Registration Act, to cancel the document registered in a fraudulent manner.

¶4Section 77-A was inserted by T.N.Act 41 of 2022 with effect from 16.08.2022. Section 77-A confers power on the District Registrar to cancel the registered document in certain cases. Sub-Section (1) stipulates that the Registrar, either suo motu or on a complaint received from any person is of the opinion that the registration of document is made in contravention of Section 22-A or Section 22-B shall issue a notice to the executant and all the parties to the document and parties to subsequent documents, if any, and all other persons who, in the opinion of the Registrar, may be affected by the cancellation of the document, to show cause as to why the registration of the document shall not be cancelled. On consideration of reply, if any received therefore, the Registrar may cancel the registration of Page No.3 of 10 the document and cause to enter such cancellation in the relevant books and indexes.

¶5An appeal has been contemplated under Section 77-B of the Registration Act and an aggrieved person from and out of the order, if any passed by the District Registrar may prefer an appeal before the Inspector General of Registration.

¶6Learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents would contend that the complaint has not been entertained in view of the circular issued by the Inspector General of Registration vide letter dated 29.09.2023, which was issued based on the order passed in W.P.(MD).No.14546 & batch etc., of 2022 dated 27.03.2023 and W.P.No.28728 of 2018 dated 27.06.2023 & W.P.No.18814 of 2023 dated

27.06.2023. The letter dated 29.09.2023 reads as under: @bghUs; bjhlh;ghf jkpH;ehL jpUj;jr;rl;lk; 41-2022 mKy;gLj;jg;gl;L mjid ifahSk; tHpKiwfs; bjhlh;ghf ghh;it 1y; fhqk; ,t;tYtyf foj tHp midj;J

khtl;lg;gjpthsh;fSf;Fk;

mwpt[iu tH';fg;gl;lJ/ jw;nghJ ghh;it 3y; fhqk; tHf;fpy; brd;id Page No.4 of 10 cah;ePjpkd;w kJiu fpis tH';fpa Mizapy; fPH;f;fz;lthW fUj;J bjhptpj;Js;sJ/ i. whether the recitals in a document presented for registration, can be examined and determine that such document was fraudulently executed or registered; ii. Whether a document in which the recitals alone are questioned can be considered only as voidable which would normally necessitate the filing of the suit to set aside the particular document or whether even those documents can be cancelled by the Sub Registrar under Section 77A of the Registration Act; iii. Whether exercise of power under Section 77A must be restricted to registration of documents in contravention to Section 22-A or 22-B of the Registration Act, 1908 alone? iv. Whether the exercise of such power under Section 77A of the Registration Act can be prospective in nature of retrospective in nature? nkw;go tpdhf;fis guprPypj;jpl Larger Benchf;F ePjpkd;wk; ghpe;Jiuj;Js;sJ vd;Wk;. nkw;go Larger Benchd; Kot[ tUk; tiu rhh;gjpthsh;fs; vt;tpj eltof;ifa[k; bjhlu ntz;lhk; vdt[k; Miz gpwg;gpf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ/ ,nj nghy; ghh;it (5)?y; fhqk; brd;id cah;ePjpkd;w khz;g[kpf ePjpgjp jdJ Mizapy; fPH;fz;lthW fUj;J bjhptpf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ/ ".......In view of the above order, this Court once again reiterates that the District Registrars across Tamil Nadu shall not take any Page No.5 of 10 further action on the application submitted under Section 77A of the Registration Act, till a final decision is rendered by the Larger Bench", vd Miz gpwg;gpj;Js;shu;/ nkw;fhz; ePjpkd;w Mizfspd; kPJ ,j;Jiw nkw;bfhs;sg;glntz;oa eltof;if bjhh;ghf muR Tljy; jiyik tHf;fwp"hpd; fUj;J nfhug;gl;ljpy; ghh;it (6)?y; fhqk; fUj;jpy;. gjpt[r;rl;lg;gphpt[ 77Ad; fPH; bgwg;gLk; g[fhh; kDf;fs; kPJ. Khepyk; KgtJk; cs;s khtl;lg;gjpthsh;fs; vt;tpj eltof;ifa[k; nkw;bfhs;sf;TlhJ v fUj;J bjhptpj;js;shh;/ vdnt gjpt[r;rl;lg;gphpt[ 77Ad; fPH; tprhuiz mYtyh;fshf cs;s khtl;lg;gjpthsh;(eph;thfk;) Larger Benchd; Kot[ tUk; tiu vt;tpj tprhuiza[k; nkw;bfhs;sf;TlJ vd mwpt[Wj;jg;gLfpwJ/ ,e;j mwpt[iu 16/08/2022f;F Kd;dh; gjpt[ Mtzg;gjpt[fs; kw;Wk; gpd;dh; gjpt[ bra;ag;gl;l gjpt[fSf;Fk; bghUe;Jk; vd bjhptpf;fg;gLfpwJ/@

¶7Learned Special Government Pleader Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan would contend that all the batch of writ petitions are pending. However, Section-77A and Section 77-B has not been stayed by this Court. So long as the provisions are not stayed and remain in the statute book, the Authorities are empowered to exercise the powers conferred under the provision. Mere framing of issues in the writ petition or any interim order, in connection with Page No.6 of 10 the facts of the particular case would not be an impediment for entertaining a complaint filed under Section 77-A of the Registration Act. Further, the retrospective/retro-active application of Section 77-A is the larger issue which is raised in the batch of writ petitions, which is now pending before the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.10291 of 2022 and etc., Thus, the pendency of batch of writ petitions relating to the issue of retrospective/retro-active application of the amended provision will not be a bar for the District Registrar/Competent Authority to conduct an enquiry and dispose of the complaints filed by aggrieved persons under Section 77-A and also an appeal if any, preferred under Section 77-B of the Registration Act.

¶8Pertinently, Section 77-A and Section 77-B were inserted pursuant to the orders of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court. While so, the amendment is to be operative necessarily for the purpose of redressing the greivances of the persons to cancel the fraudulent documents, if any registered. Page No.7 of 10

¶9It is not in dispute that Section – 77-A has not been stayed by the Court and therefore, the Authorities are bound to exercise the powers conferred under Section-77-A and 77-B and entertain complaints to cancel the documents which were registered subsequent to the amendment. It is made clear that the documents registered prior to the amendment cannot be the subject matter of adjudication under Section 77-A, since the issue regarding retrospective/retro-active application of Section 77-A and 77-B is subjudice before the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court.

¶10However, there is no impediment for entertaining the complaints to cancel the documents which were registered subsequent to the date of amendment i.e., 16.08.2022. In this context, Inspector General of Registration is directed to issue revised circular to the Competent Authority to entertain the complaints and dispose of the same by following the procedures as contemplated and by affording opportunity to the parties, as expeditiously as possible.

¶11In view of the discussions made above, the order under challenge dated 11.10.2023 in W.P.No.28358 of 2023 is set aside. The 1st Page No.8 of 10 respondent/District Registrar, Namakkal District is directed to conduct an enquiry by affording opportunity to all the parties and dispose of the complaint as expeditiously as possible. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands allowed. [S.M.S.J.] [K.R.S.J.]

12.02.2024 Index : Speaking Order : : veda Note:The registry is directed to communicate a copy of this judgment to Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai –

¶28To

1.The District Registrar, Office of the District Registrar Office, Namakkal District.

2.The District Superintendent of Police, Namakkal District, Namakkal.

3.The Sub Registrar, Rasipuram Sub Registrar Office, Namakkal District.

4.Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai – 600 028. Page No.9 of 10 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J. AND K.RAJASEKAR,J. veda Judgment in W.A.No.3573 of 2023

12.02.2024 Page No.10 of 10

2024:MHC:6489 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 12.02.2024 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Writ Appeal No.3573 of 2023 K.Murugesan ... Appellant Vs. 1.The District Registrar, Office of the District Registrar Office, Namakkal District. 2.The District Superintendent of Police, Namakkal District, Namakkal. 3.The Sub Registrar, Rasipuram Sub Registrar Office, Namakkal District. 4.N.Mani @ Kanagaraj 5.S.K.Sathishkumar 6.Yuvarani 7.P.Anandan 8.N.Kumar 9.S.Subramanian 10.Rathanapriya (SRO-Rasipuram) ... Respondents Page No.1 of 10 Prayer:Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 11.10.2023 in W.P.No.28358 of 2023. For Appellant : Mr.K.Karthikeyan For R1 to R3 : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan Special Government Pleader