Dismissed

M/s.Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd. v. The Inspector General of Registration

Madras HC10 Jan 2023WP/537/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging refusal to register a sale deed was allowed. The impugned refusal slip relying on 2013 circular was set aside as the authority was barred from ignoring the 2021 circular. The register was directed to accept and register the document within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order set aside; the second respondent directed to accept and register the document within four weeks.

M/s.Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd. Vs The… — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.537 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED :10.01.2023

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR

¶6

Writ Petition No.537 of 2023

¶7

M/s.Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd., Rep. by its Authorised Officer, HDFC House – 29, Kamaraj Road, Near Circuit House, Coimbatore – 641 018.

¶8

Mrs.Rani ... Petitioners

¶9

-Vs-

¶10

The Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome High Road, Mandaveli, Chennai – 600 028.

¶11

The Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub-Registrar, Attur, Salem – Cuddalore Main Road, Pungavadi Puthur, Salem, Tamil Nadu – 636 102. … Respondents

¶12

Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the respondent herein vide refusal check slip in Na.Ka.No.451/2022 dated 18.10.2022 and quash the same and consequently direct the 2^nd respondent to register the sale certificate dated 30.09.2022 issued by the 1^st petitioner in favour of the 2^nd petitioner Mrs.Rani.

¶13

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

¶14

1/6

¶15

W.P.No.537 of 2023

¶16

For Petitioners : Mr.K.J.Parthasarathy For Respondents : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan Special Government Pleader

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The prayer sought for herein is for a writ of Certiorarified

¶19

Mandamus to quash the impugned proceedings of the respondents herein vide refusal check slip in Na.Ka.No.451/2022 dated 18.10.2022 and consequently direct the 2^nd respondent to register the sale certificate dated 30.09.2022 issued by the 1^st petitioner in favour of the 2^nd petitioner Mrs.Rani.

¶20

The petitioners presented a document i.e., sale deed executed by

¶21

the first petitioner i.e., Corporation in favour of the second petitioner for registration at the office of the second respondent i.e., Registering Authority. However the same has been refused to be accepted by giving the refusal check slip dated 18.10.2022, which is impugned herein.

¶22

The impugned check slip reads thus:

¶23

@jpUkjp/uhzp f-bg/ RFkhh;. vd;gtuhy; 17/10/2022 njjpapy; gjpt[f;Fj; jhf;fy; bra;ag;gl;l fpua rhd;W Mtzk;

¶24

2/6

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.No.537 of 2023

¶27

(TP/135223322-2022) fPH;f;fz;l fhuzj;jpw;fhf jpUg;gg;gLfpwJ/

¶28

gjpt[j;Jiwj;jiyth; mth;fs; Rw;wwpf;if vz;/18223-rp12013?3 ehs;/ 08/11/2013d; go Mtzj;jpy; fz;l brhj;jpd; chpik Fwpj;J tpy;y';fr;rhd;W ghprPypf;fg;gl;ljpy; Mtzj;jpy; fz;Ls;s brhj;J nryk; khtl;l K:d;whtJ TLjy; ePjpkd;wj;jhy; REP No.115-2019. A.O.P.No.56-2018 d;go gw;Wif bra;ag;gl;Ls;sJ/ vdnt. brhj;jpd; kPJs;s gw;Wifia ePf;fp Mtzj;ij kPs rkh;g;gpf;Fk; bghUl;L Mtzk; mrypy; jpUg;gg;gLfpwJ/@

¶29

Assailing the same, Mr.K.J.Parthasarathy, learned counsel

¶30

appearing for the petitioner would submit that, when the second respondent relied upon the circular issued by the first respondent dated 08.11.2013, definitely is empowered to take note of the circular issued by the very same first respondent dated 10.07.2021, wherein after the said circular dated 08.11.2013, the following orders have been passed:

¶31

“vdnt. 'Secured Creditor' vd;w jFjpapy; t';fpahy; vGjpf;bfhLf;fg;gLk; Vy fpuar; rhd;Wfs; gjpt[f;F jhf;fy; bra;ag;gl;lhy;. mr;brhj;J kPJ ePjpkd;wk; xd;wpdhy; gw;Wif Miz gpwg;gpf;fg;gl;Ls;sjd; fhuzj;jpw;fhf kWg;g[ Fwpg;g[ (Check slip) kw;Wk; kWg;g[ Miz (Refusal Order) tH';fg;glf; TlhJ vd;Wk; Mtzg; gjptpid epWj;jplhky; ,ju rl;l njitfs; g{h;j;jp bra;ag;gl;L ,Ug;gpd; Mtzg;gjpt[ nkw;bfhs;s gjpt[ mYtyu;fs; mwpt[Wj;jg;gLfpd;wdh;/@

¶32

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

¶33

3/6

¶34

W.P.No.537 of 2023

¶35

Therefore, the learned counsel would contend that the impugned

¶36

check slip issued by the second respondent is in complete violation of the

¶37

circular issued by the first respondent dated 10.07.2021.

¶38

Heard Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, who would submit that, in view of the circular issued by the Inspector General of Registration dated 10.07.2021, the matter can be remitted back to the second respondent for reconsideration.

¶39

I have considered the said submissions made by the learned

¶40

counsel appearing for both sides and have perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶41

Insofar as the reason stated by the second respondent in the impugned check slip is concerned, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, it is unjustifiable, because, when the second respondent taking note of the 2013 circular, is empowered to take note of the circular issued by the Inspector General of Registration dated

¶42

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

4/6

W.P.No.537 of 2023

Court.

10.07.2021, which in fact passed pursuant to the orders passed by this Court.

¶47

Whether the second respondent is ignorant of the circular issued by the first respondent dated 10.11.2021 or for any other reasons for the second respondent who is citing the 2013 circular, in anyway it is unacceptable, therefore, even though, this Court feels that this writ petition can be allowed with costs, since a request is made by the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents to remit the matter back to the respondents for reconsideration, this Court is inclined to dispose of this writ petition with the following orders:

¶48

That the impugned order is set aside and consequently, a direction

¶49

is given to the second respondent to accept the document filed by the petitioner for registration, and if it is otherwise in order, the same shall be registered in accordance with law.

¶50

 The needful as indicated above shall be undertaken by the second respondent within a period of four(4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶51

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

¶52

5/6

¶53

W.P.No.537 of 2023

¶54

R. SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶55

¶56

With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶57

10.01.2023

¶58

Index : Yes/No Speaking order: Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No

¶59

¶60

¶61

The Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome High Road, Mandaveli, Chennai – 600 028.

¶62

The Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub-Registrar, Attur, Salem – Cuddalore Main Road, Pungavadi Puthur, Salem, Tamil Nadu – 636 102.

¶63

Writ Petition No.537 of 2023

¶64

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

¶65

6/6

M/s.Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd. v. The Inspector General of Registration

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd. v. The Inspector General of Registration

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Savithri Vs The District Registrar

Swaminathan Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

Mohan Kumar Vs The Inspector General of Registration

S.Sivakami Vs The Tahsildar

Mehar Khatoon Vs The District Collector

Savariyammal Vs The Tahsildar