W.P.(MD)No.11955 of 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.04.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN W.P.(MD) No.11955 of 2025 P.Ganesan ... Petitioner vs. 1.The District Registrar, Theni, Theni District. 2.The Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar, Theni District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent herein to forthwith register the sale deed dated 20.03.2025 presented by the petitioner for unencumbered properties of petitioner as per the liberty granted by this Court by order dated 06.02.2025 made in WP(MD) No. 15324 of 2024 and within a reasonable time as may be fixed by this Court. For Petitioner :Mr.G.Thalaimuthurasu For Respondents :Mr.R.Suresh Kumar Additional Government Pleader 1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.11955 of 2025 ORDER The petitioner seeks for the following relief:- “Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent herein to forthwith register the sale deed dated 20.03.2025 presented by the petitioner for unencumbered properties of petitioner as per the liberty granted by this Court by order dated 06.02.2025 made in WP(MD) No. 15324 of 2024 and within a reasonable time as may be fixed by this Court.” 2.The petitioner claims that his father, V.Paradesi, had filed a suit for declaration and injunction, and the suit was decreed. Consequently, the civil Court had declared V.Paradesi as the owner of the property. The petitioner pleads that on the death of Paradesi, he succeeded to the estate. He attempted to alienate the property. The second respondent issued a refusal check slip on 03.07.2024. The said refusal check slip was challenged by way of a writ petition in W.P. (MD) No.15324 of 2024. While dismissing the writ petition, I made the following observations:- “10. The option is for the petitioner either to accept the sale deeds that are found in the encumbrance certificate, exclude those extents and present a document for the 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.11955 of 2025 remaining extent or to challenge the alienations made by way of a suit. The documents have been brought to the notice of the petitioner by way of a proceeding of the Sub Registrar on 03.07.2024. Therefore, there is always time to the petitioner to present a suit for title and other consequential reliefs. Suffice to state that these are not matters, which can be gone into a writ petition.” 3.The petitioner subsequently excluded the items, over which the documents had already been executed and presented a fresh deed. Yet again, this was rejected under the impugned order. Challenging the same, the present writ petition. 4.I heard Mr.G.Thalaimuthurasu for the petitioner and Mr.R.Suresh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents. 5.Mr.R.Suresh Kumar, on instructions, states that the registration was refused for the following reasons:- “Nkw;gb egUf;F nkhj;j nrhj;Jf;fSk; mtu; xUtUf;F kl;LNk ghj;jpag;gl;lJ vd;gjw;F FLk;g cWg;gpdu;fshy; vOjg;gl;l Mtzq;fs; VJk; tpy;yq;f rhd;wpjopy; ,lk;ngwtpy;iy. 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.11955 of 2025 Nkw;fz;l nrhj;Jf;fs; jdf;F kl;LNk ghj;jpag;gl;lJ vd;gjw;fhd tUtha;j;Jiw cs;spl;l gpw Jiwfspd; MtzKk; jhf;fy; nra;ag;gltpy;iy. vdNt xl;L nkhj;jkhf 7 FLk;gq;fSf;Fk; mtu;fsJ thupRfSf;Fk; ghj;jpag;gl;l nrhj;Jf;fis> mjpy; 1 FLk;gj;jpd; xU thuprhd jpU. fNzrd; (j/ng guNjrp) mtu;fs; kl;Lk; nrhe;jk; nfhz;lhb Mtzk; gjpT nra;a Kay;tJ Vw;GilaJ my;y. NkYk; jpU.fNzrd; mtu;fs; nkhj;j nrhj;jpd; VO ghfj;jpy; xU ghfj;jpy; md;dhUf;F ghj;jpag;gl;l nghJtpy; gpuptpidapy;yhj gq;fpid kl;LNk tpw;gid nra;a ,aYk; vd;gij njuptpj;J nfhs;fpNwd;. NkYk; Mtzk; jhf;fy; nra;Ak; NghJ Mtzj;jpy; njuptpj;Js;s ifkhw;Wj; njhif my;yJ nrhj;J tpguj;jpy; Fwpg;gpl;Ls;s re;ij kjpg;G ,jpy; vJ mjpf kjpg;Ngh me;j kjpg;gpw;F Kj;jpiu fl;lzk; kw;Wk; gjpT fl;lzk; muR fzf;fpy; nrYj;jpa gpd;Ng Mtzk; jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl Ntz;Lk; vd gzpTld; njuptpj;J nfhs;fpNwd;” 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.11955 of 2025 6.A perusal of the reasons given by the second respondent shows that he has dealt with title of the petitioner to the properties. The petitioner's father's title is supported by a decree of the civil Court. Therefore, the Sub Registrar need not probe into the issue again. In fact, the decree and judgment had already been registered and the copies thereof were available on the file of the first respondent. 7.In terms of Rule 55 of the Registration Rules, the Registrar cannot go into issues of title. If the document complies with all other requirements of the Registration Act, 1908, the respondents are duty bound to register the document. This position has been settled by the Supreme Court in K.Gopi v. Sub-Registrar & Others, 2025 SCC Online SC 740, wherein it had held as follows:- “15.The registering officer is not concerned with the title held by the executant. He has no adjudicatory power to decide whether the executant has any title. Even if an executant executes a sale deed or a lease in respect of a land in respect of which he has no title, the registering officer cannot refuse to register the document if all the procedural compliances are made and the necessary stamp duty as well as registration 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.11955 of 2025 charges/fee are paid. We may note here that under the scheme of the 1908 Act, it is not the function of the Sub- Registrar or Registering Authority to ascertain whether the vendor has title to the property which he is seeking to transfer. Once the registering authority is satisfied that the parties to the document are present before him and the parties admit execution thereof before him, subject to making procedural compliances as narrated above, the document must be registered. The execution and registration of a document have the effect of transferring only those rights, if any, that the executant possesses. If the executant has no right, title, or interest in the property, the registered document cannot effect any transfer.” 8.In the light of the above discussion, the impugned order is quashed. There shall be a direction to the respondents to register the document presented by the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9.The Writ Petition is disposed of, with the aforesaid directions. No costs. 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.11955 of 2025 Index :Yes / No 29.04.2025 Internet :Yes / No To 1.The District Registrar, Theni, Theni District. 2.The Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar, Theni District. 7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.11955 of 2025 V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J. mm W.P.(MD)No.11955 of 2025 29.04.2025 8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis