Dismissed

K.S.Dravida Mani v. the District Registrar

Madras HC14 Sept 2023WP/26980/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Madras dismissed writ petitions challenging show cause notices issued under Section 77A of the Registration Act. The Court held that a writ is not entertainable unless issued by an incompetent authority and emphasized that authorities must be allowed to adjudicate issues rather than allowing High Court to conduct roving enquiries.

What the court decided

AI extract

K.S.Dravida Mani Vs the District Registrar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.Nos.26980 & 26981 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 14.09.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶6

W.P.Nos.26980 and 26981 of 2023 and

¶7

W.M.P.Nos.26412 and 26413 of 2023

¶8

K.S.Dravida Mani ...Petitioner in WP.26980/2023 P.Ramar ...Petitioner in WP.26981/2023

¶9

-Vs-

¶10

1.The District Registrar Office of the Registrar Thindivanam, Villupuram District.

¶11

2.P.Karpagam ...Respondents in both WPs

¶12

Common Prayer: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings of the 1^st respondent in Na.Ka.No.3339/Aa3/2022 dated 14.07.2023.

¶13

(in both WPs) For Petitioners : Mrs.V.S.Manimegalai For R1 : Mr.T.Arun Kumar Additional Government Pleader

¶14

1/6

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

W.P.Nos.26980 & 26981 of 2023

¶17

COMMON ORDER

¶18

The show cause notices issued by the District Registrar in proceedings dated 14.07.2023 under Section 77A of the Registration Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are under challenge in the present writ petitions.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioners mainly contended that the documents executed during the years 2000, 2016, 2019 and 2022 are sought to be quashed in the present writ petitions.

¶20

In respect of cancellation of the documents registered prior to the insertion of Section 77A of the Registration Act, there is no express power granted to the authorities to cancel the documents. This Court held that Section 77A is to be operated with prospective effect in respect of the documents registered after the Amended Act with effect from 16.08.2022. However, n o writ against a show cause notice is entertainable, unless such notice has been issued by an incompetent authority having no jurisdiction or tainted with the allegations of malafides.

¶21

4. There are possibilities of multitude of issues to raise between the

¶22

2/6

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

W.P.Nos.26980 & 26981 of 2023

¶25

parties under the provisions of the Act. It is not as if the District Registrars are empowered to deal with the complaints only under Section 77A of the Act. Incidentally, if the allegations found are in violation of Section 32 and Section 68 etc., then criminal prosecution under Section 82 is also required. Therefore, merely on the ground of Section 77A and its retrospective application, a show cause notice need not to be quashed. Contrarily, the person receiving such show cause notice is entitled to raise all the grounds including the jurisdiction or authority or otherwise. Thus, the scope of an enquiry cannot be curved by the Court by depriving the aggrieved persons to redress their grievances.

¶26

5. Nipping at the bud is not desirable, since the authorities are losing their opportunity of adjudication of issues in accordance with law. High Court cannot conduct a roving enquiry in respect of such allegations relating to title and the documents registered under the Registration Act. Such an enquiry is to be conducted for verifying the original records and the documents presented by the parties. Therefore, in all circumstances, the parties receiving show cause notice is expected to participate in the process

¶27

3/6

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

W.P.Nos.26980 & 26981 of 2023

¶30

of enquiry by raising all the grounds. The authorities under the Registration Act are exercising quasi judicial powers and therefore, there is no impediment to raise all the grounds including the grounds of limitation, jurisdiction, etc.

¶31

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners made a submission that the petitioners have already submitted their explanations. In this regard, the petitioners are at liberty to submit the relevant documents, if any and on receipt of the same, the authority competent shall proceed with the enquiry and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible.

¶32

7. With these observations, these Writ Petitions stand dismissed.

¶33

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No Costs.

¶34

14.09.2023

¶35

Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation:Yes/No dpa/hvk

¶36

4/6

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

W.P.Nos.26980 & 26981 of 2023

¶39

¶40

The District Registrar Office of the Registrar Thindivanam, Villupuram District.

¶41

5/6

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶43

W.P.Nos.26980 & 26981 of 2023

¶44

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

¶45

dpa/hvk

¶46

W.P.Nos.26980 and 26981 of 2023

¶47

14.09.2023

¶48

6/6

¶49

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

K.S.Dravida Mani v. the District Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

K.S.Dravida Mani v. the District Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Xavier Britto Vs The Secretary to the Government of India

S.Sampath Vs The Sub Registrar

L.Srinivasulu Vs The Secretary

R.Rajaveni (Died), Vs The State of Tamil nadu

Sakkara Rasu Vs The state of Tamil nadu

K.G.Meiyazhagan Vs The Special District Revenue Officer