Petitioner wound up business and sought to sell property. Respondent issued direction to Sub Registrar not to register conveyance without NOC. Single Judge set aside direction relying on Division Bench ruling that Revenue officials lack power to interdict registration.
Petition allowed; 1st respondent directed to register sale deed without requiring NOC.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH MAY 2011 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1933
WP(C).No. 12664 of 2011(G)
PETITIONER:
MATHEW JOSEPH, S/O. MANI JOSEPH, AGED 43 YEARS, KALARIPARAMBIL HOUSE, POOVATHODE.P.O, MEENACHIL TALUK.
BY ADV. SRI.RAJU K.MATHEWS
RESPONDENTS:
GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.ARAVIND KUMAR BABU
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C).No.12664/2011
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-
EXHIBIT P-1 : LETTER NO.A2/6136/06 DATED 18/04/2008 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P-2 : JUDGMENT DATED 21/1/2010 IN W.A.NO.2080/09. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL.
True copy
P.A. to Judge
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J
W.P.(C) No.12664 OF 2011
-------------------------------------------------Dated this the 25th day of May 2011
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who is the owner of the property comprised in survey No.724 of Vagamon Village, as covered by sale deed No.1871/1996 of Peermede SRO, was enjoying his property, on the strength of the title derived, with absolute ownership and exclusive possession and was running a 'Tea Factory' therein. By virtue of the changed scenario with regard to the market conditions, the petitioner wound up the business and sought to sell the property; for which an agreement for sale is stated as executed.
W.P.(C) No.12664/2011
2
relevant provisions of the Registration Act, read with Rule 67 of the Kerala Registration Rules.
the Division Bench in the said case as stated in para 1 and 2; which are extracted below:
Division Bench observed in para 14 and 15 as given below:
14. “It may be true that large number of bogus pattas are in circulation in that area. Complicity of some of the officials in the Department is also not ruled out by the
W.P.(C) No.12664/2011
3
Government. But so long as the provisions contained in the Registration Act do not give any power or authority to the revenue officials to meddle with the power vested with the registering authority under the Act, the action of the respondents – revenue officials cannot be countenanced or justified.
15. In this context it may be noticed that appellants Nos. 2 and 3 have shown their preparedness to purchase the property in question at their own risk. They seem to be confident enough about the title of appellant No.1 over the property in question. They are prepared to spend money on the stamp paper and get the document registered in their name. If appellant No.1 does not have any valid title over the property in question, he cannot obviously pass on any title to appellants 2 and 3. In other words, if appellant No.1 has a defective title over the property he can only pass such a defective title to his assignees. They cannot get a better right or title over the property just because a document has been registered under the Act. In the absence of any provision which allows the revenue officials to interdict the registering officer from admitting a document for registration, and to insist that registration can be effected only on production of No Objection Certificate, we have no hesitation to hold that the questions posed above have to be answered in the negative. We do so.”
W.P.(C) No.12664/2011
4
requirements under law, without any regard to production of NOC from the revenue authorities.
Writ Petition is allowed. No cost.
vdv P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether revenue officials have power to issue prohibitory orders to the registering authority preventing registration of a sale deed without an NOC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.A. No.2080/2009Relied on¶5
Mathew Joseph
The Sub Registrar, Peermade
Sub Collector, Devikulam
The Tahsildar, Peermade
P.R.Ramachandra Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
