IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
Safwan Sathar.V.P, S/o Abdul Sathar.V.P. – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 16221 of 2024
Decided on : 26-07-2024
REGISTRATION - ADVOCATE'S RIGHTS - The court interpreted the Kerala Document Writers' License Rules, 1960 and the Indian Registration (Filing of True Copies) Rules, 1967, concluding that while an Advocate can prepare non-testamentary documents for registration, they are not permitted to prepare manuscript copies for filing, which must be done by licensed scribes. This distinction influenced the court's decision to dismiss the petitioner's request for registration.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an Advocate, prepared an assignment deed and a filing sheet for registration but was denied registration by the 4th respondent because the filing sheet was not prepared by a licensed scribe.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner, as an Advocate, has the right to prepare non-testamentary documents for registration but is not authorized to prepare manuscript copies for filing, which must be done by licensed scribes as per the applicable rules.
Issues: Whether an Advocate is entitled to prepare manuscript copies of documents for filing along with the original document under the relevant registration rules.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Rules, 1960 and 1967 clearly delineate the roles of Advocates and licensed scribes, allowing Advocates to prepare documents for registration but restricting the preparation of manuscript copies to licensed scribes only.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed as the petitioner was not entitled to the relief sought due to the specific provisions of the registration rules.
JUDGMENT :
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
The petitioner is an Advocate by profession. He prepared a document (assignment deed) as well as filing sheet (manuscript copy of document presented for filing) for his client and presented the same before the 4th respondent for registration. However the 4th respondent refused to register the document holding that the filing sheet attached to the document was not prepared by a licensed scribe. The filing sheet prepared by the petitioner was returned to him with a direction to produce a fresh one prepared by a licensed scribe along with Ext.P2 letter. It is challenging Ext.P2, the petitioner has approached this Court.
2. I have heard Sri. Prem Navaz, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Vidya Kuriakose, the learned Government Pleader.
3. Relying on Rules 4 and 6 of the Kerala Document Writers' License Rules, 1960 (for short 'the Rules, 1960) the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri. Prem Navaz submitted that the petitioner being an Advocate has every right to prepare filing sheet attached to the document. Per contra, the learned Government Pleader Smt. Vidya Kuriakose submitted that as per Rule 6 sub clause (xxii) of the Indian Registration (Filing of True Copies) Rules, 1967 (for short 'the Rules, 1967), the manuscript copies of documents presented for filing shall be prepared by a scribe holding a licence under the Rules, 1960.
4. The persons eligible to prepare a document presented for registration under the Indian Registration Act, 1908 are regulated by the Rules, 1960 and the persons eligible to prepare the manuscript copy of a document presented for filing along with the original document are regulated by the Rules, 1967. Rule 4 of the Rules, 1967 prescribes that every document presented for registration under the Indian Registration Act shall be duly accompanied by a true copy of that document. As per Rule 6 of Rules, 1967, true copy can be printed, typewritten or manuscript.
5. Rule 6 of the Rules, 1960 deals with the preparation and presentation of non-testamentary documents for registration. Sub-rule (1) of Rule 6 says that every non-testamentary document, except documents executed by or on behalf of or in favour of the Government of India, or Government of a State in India or local authorities and other bodies corporate presented for registration shall be prepared by a document writer. However, the proviso to the said sub-rule says that no licence will be necessary in the case of a document writer who is an Advocate or Pleader practising before any court in the State. Thus, an Advocate is also entitled to prepare and present a document for registration. But, the question is, whether an Advocate is entitled to prepare the manuscript copies of a document to be presented for filing along with the original document.
6. Rule 6(xxii) of the Rules, 1967 says that manuscript copies of documents presented for filing along with the original document shall be prepared by a scribe holding a licence under the Rules, 1960. Advocates are not permitted to prepare manuscript copy of a document as permitted in the case of preparation of non-testamentary document presented for registration as per the proviso to Rule 6(1) of the Rules, 1960. In other words, as per Rule 6(xxii) of the Rules, 1967, only class of persons empowered to prepare manuscript copies of documents presented for filing are 'scribes' holding a licence under the Rules, 1960. Going by the definition, in Rule 3(5) of the Rules, 1960, a 'scribe' is a person who only assists a document writer in the preparation of documents for registration and who transcribes the documents to be presented for registration. Separate license is provided for document writer and the scribe under the Rules. Thus, even though Advocates practising before any court in the State are entitled to prepare non-testamentary documents to be presented for registration, they are not empowered to prepare manuscript copies of the document to be
AI
The Registering Officer must verify original documents for property registration to prevent fraud, and parties claiming rights must establish their claims before a competent court.
Registration authorities must decide on pending document registration within time frame, issuing speaking order if refused.
A professional's submission of documents on client instructions does not incur criminal liability unless there is direct evidence of conspiracy or deliberate misconduct.
The Sub-Registrar has a duty to verify General Power of Attorney documents before registration; failure to do so constitutes misconduct warranting disciplinary action.
The court reinforced the principle that legibility and clarity of documents are essential for the proper functioning of judicial processes, mandating compliance with established procedural rules to e....
The Registering Officer cannot refuse to register a document based solely on the non-production of a prior title deed, as per the Registration Rules (Kerala) provisions.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.