A Writ Appeal challenging an order dismissing a writ petition sought cancellation of a sale deed. The High Court held that questions of title cannot be determined in a writ petition under the Registration Act, especially when a Civil Suit is pending. The Appeal was dismissed.
Writ Appeal dismissed for want of merits.
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.
W.A.No.2295 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.08.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SUNDAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR
W.A.No.2295 of 2024 and
C.M.P.No.16120 of 2024
M.Senthil Vadivel
... Appellant
Vs.
... Respondents
Page 1 of 6
Prayer:-
W.A.No.2295 of 2024
Prayer:- Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 16.04.2024 in W.P.No.29688 of 2022 on the file of this Court.
| For Appellant | : | M/s.AL.Gandhimathi Senior Counsel for M/s.L.Palani Muthu |
|---|---|---|
| For R1 | : | Mr.M.Rajendran Additional Government Pleader (Cooperative Societies) |
| For R2 & R3 | : | Mr.P.Harish Government Advocate |
J U D G M E N T
(Judgment was delivered by S.S. SUNDAR, J. )
This Writ Appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single
Judge dated 16.04.2024 in W.P.No.29688 of 2022.
2.Brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of this Writ Appeal are
as follows :
2.1.The appellant herein filed the writ petition challenging the order
dated 08.08.2022 of the 2nd respondent confirming the order dated
Page 2 of 6
W.A.No.2295 of 2024
26.09.2021 of the 3rd respondent. The subject matter of this lis is a plot in the layout promoted by a Society.
2.2.On the ground that the 4th respondent has executed a sale deed without there being a sale deed executed by the promoter of the layout, a representation was submitted for cancellation of the sale deed which is registered by the Sub-Registrar. The petitioner has approached the respondents for a declaratory relief resulting in cancellation of registered document. However, the District Registrar, by the order dated 26.09.2021, refused to go into the validity of document or cancel the document as the parties had already approached the Civil Court and suits are pending with regard to the transactions. The 3rd respondent, in his order, referred to the parties to approach the Civil Court for appropriate relief.
2.3.As against the same, an appeal was preferred before the 2nd respondent and the 2nd respondent, by the order dated 08.08.2022, dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant, confirming the order of 3rd respondent.
2.4.When the petitioner challenged the order of 2nd respondent before this Court in the writ petition, learned Single Judge of this Court, by order impugned dated 16.04.2024, dismissed the writ petition, holding that
Page 3 of 6
W.A.No.2295 of 2024
question of title cannot be gone into by the respondents while exercising power under the Registration Act.
2.5.Challenging the order of the learned Single Judge, the above Writ Appeal is filed.
3.This Court, even earlier, has held that allotment in favour of 4th respondent cannot be challenged before this Court in a writ petition in W.P.(MD).No.16038 of 2019 by order 10.09.2020. The appeal in W.A.(MD) No.399 of 2021 as against the said order, was also dismissed. It is admitted that a Civil Suit is also pending in O.S.No.185 of 2015 on the file of District Munsif Court, Karaikudi. Learned Single Judge has rightly held that the Registrar cannot go into the question of title merely on the basis of pleadings among the parties. Recently, a Division Bench of this Court, in which one of us was a party, in a batch of cases in W.P.No.10291 of 2022, etc. batch, dated 02.08.2024 [M.Kathirvel v. Inspector General of Registration and others] , elaborately considered the scope of Registration Act. While striking down Section 77-A of the Registration Act, this Court has further held that the Sub-Registrar or the District Registrar has no power
Page 4 of 6
W.A.No.2295 of 2024
to cancel registration or invalidate the registered documents and the parties can only approach the Civil Court for appropriate relief.
4.In view of the above, this Court finds no merit in this Writ Appeal.
Accordingly, this Writ Appeal is dismissed for want of merits. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(S.S.S.R., J.) (K.R.S., J.) 29.08.2024
mkn
Internet : Yes Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No
To
Page 5 of 6
W.A.No.2295 of 2024
S.S. SUNDAR, J. and K. RAJASEKAR, J.
mkn
W.A.No.2295 of 2024
29.08.2024
Page 6 of 6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Registrar of Cooperative Societies has the jurisdiction to examine questions of title in a writ petition.
Whether a Division Bench order striking down Section 77-A of the Registration Act bars the power to invalidate registered documents.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.P.(MD).No.16038 of 2019Referred¶45
W.A.(MD) No.399 of 2021Referred¶45
O.S.No.185 of 2015Referred¶45
M.Kathirvel v. Inspector General of Registration and othersExplained¶45
W.P.No.10291 of 2022 (batch)
M.Senthil Vadivel
The Registrar of Cooperative Societies (Housing)
S.S. Sundar
K. Rajasekar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
