The Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the registration of a unilateral cancellation deed for a settlement. Relying on identical precedent, it held writ jurisdiction is not maintainable and the remedy lies in filing a civil suit.
Writ petition dismissed; liberty granted to petitioner to file appropriate civil suit; no costs.
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 JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.06.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.No.14980 of 2016 and W.M.P.Nos.13072 & 13073 of 2016
E.Sathyapriya .. Petitioner
– vs -
1.The Sub-Registrar,
Office of Thondamuthur Sub-Registrar, Thondamuthur,
Coimbatore District.
2.Chellammal
3.A.Ravichandran
4.A.Sundarrasu .. Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the impugned deed of cancellation of Settlement Deed in Doc.No.5739/2015 dated 24.07.2015 executed by the 2nd respondent and presented to and registered with the 1st respondent and the settlement deeds executed by the 2nd respondent in favour of 3rd and 4th respondents in Doc.No.6147/2015 and Doc.No.6148/2015 respectively, dated 14.08.2015 presented to and registered with the 1st respondent and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.S.Kothandaraman
For Respondent-1 : Mr. Yogesh Kannadasan, Special Government Pleader
For Respondents 2 to 4 : Mr.A.E.Ravichandran
ORDER
The present writ petition has questioned the legality of the registration of the cancellation deed executed by the 2 nd respondent settlor in favour of the settlee and the representation filed before the 1 st respondent having not evoked any response, has resulted in the filing of the present petition.
“64. Upon careful perusal of the decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court and the Full Bench, which have been relied upon by the learned counsel in support of their respective submissions, this Court is of the considered view that held that though both the decision in Satya Pal’s case and Latif’s case (supra) relate to unilateral cancellation of a sale deed, however, the issue covered in the present batch of petitions relate to unilateral cancellation of settlement deed. Further, the decision in Satya Pal’s case (supra) spells out the correct ratio in which the relevant provisions of the Act has to be interpreted and, in fact, to a limited extent the decision of the Full Bench also tags with the decision in Satya Pal’s case (supra) and upon such interpretation on the basis of the ratio laid down in Satya Pal’s case (supra), this Court answers the questions formulated in the following manner :-
Question Nos.1 & 2 :
i) Whether the Registering Authority can desist from registering a cancellation deed submitted before him by the settlor alone for
cancelling the registered Settlement Deed in the absence or consent of the settlee?
ii) Whether the Registering Authority has the power to cancel a document vide the cancellation deed, and insist the settlor and settlee to appear at the time of registration of the document, in the absence of any provision of law?
Answer :
The registering authority has no power to desist from registering a document, once it is submitted to him along with the necessary documents, which are mandated under the Act and once the document is properly registered, the registering authority, in the absence of any express provision under the Act or the Rules, is not competent to cancel the registered document.
Question Nos.3 & 4 :
iii) Whether a writ petition is maintainable questioning such registration?
iv) What is the remedy available to the parties in the event of registration of a cancellation deed unilaterally by the settlor?
Answer :
The writ petitions, at the instance of the petitioners are wholly misconceived and the writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked seeking cancellation of the respective cancellation deeds and this Court, sitting under Article 226 of the Constitution, cannot issue a writ directing the registering authority to cancel the registered document, when it involves disputed questions of fact between the parties. Further, the remedy open to the petitioners/aggrieved party is only to file a civil suit before the appropriate jurisdictional court and a writ petition is not maintainable.
65. For the reasons aforesaid, the writ petitions filed by the petitioners praying for a direction to the registering authority/respondent herein to cancel the unilaterally executed cancellation deeds in and by which the respective settlement deeds have been cancelled, cannot be entertained and, accordingly, the writ petitions
are dismissed. It is further made clear that this Court has not entered into the realm of adjudicating the legality or validity of the cancellation deed, but has only decided the power of the registering authority to entertain the document for registration and its subsequent cancellation and, therefore, it is open to the petitioners to file appropriate suit before the jurisdictional civil court or to avail any other remedy available to them under law, where all the points raised herein could be canvassed by the petitioners and if such legal recourse is taken by the petitioners, the concerned court/authority shall take up the same on its own merits and adjudicate the dispute without in any way being influenced by any observation made by this Court in the decision supra. It is also made clear that the benefit of this order shall not operate with regard to matters, which have already been decided by this Court one way or the other and the doctrine of res judicata would stand attracted.”
Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS-VIII)
//True copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
rsi
To
The Sub-Registrar, Office of Thondamuthur Sub-Registrar, Thondamuthur, Coimbatore District. +1cc to Mr.P.S.Kothandaraman, Advocate SR.No.33767 +1cc to Mr.A.E.Ravichandran, Advocate SR.No.33762 +1cc to Government Pleader SR.No.34506 W.P.No.14980 of 2016 AJB(CO) GMY(04/07/2022)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether Article 226 writ jurisdiction is maintainable for cancellation of a unilateral registration of a cancellation deed in a settlement dispute.
What is the appropriate remedy for parties aggrieved by the registration of a unilateral cancellation deed.
Whether the High Court can direct the registering authority to cancel a registered deed involving disputed questions of fact.
E.Sathyapriya
The Sub-Registrar, Office of Thondamuthur Sub-Registrar, Thondamuthur, Coimbatore District
Chellammal
A.Ravichandran
A.Sundarrasu
M.DHANDAPANI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
