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.

JUDGMENT :

KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J.

1. The property having an extent of 72.87 Ares comprised in Survey No.379/4-9 of Thrithala Village, Pattambi Taluk, Palakkad District, originally belonged to late Abubacker Haji. The petitioner is one of the legal heirs of Abubacker Haji. After the death of Abubacker Haji, the petitioner and his remaining children decided to settle the property in favour of their mother and accordingly, prepared Ext.P1 draft settlement deed and submitted the same for registration before the respondent No.1. According to the petitioner, the respondent No.1 refused to register Ext.P1 settlement deed, insisting on prior title deed of the property. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court.

2. I have heard Sri.T.H.Shain, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.B.S.Syamanthak, the learned Government Pleader.

3. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submits that the Sub-Registrar did not register Ext.P1 settlement deed since the petitioner failed to produce title deed of the property to show that his father acquired title over the property.

4. Section 34 of the REGISTRATION ACT , 1908 provides for enquiry before registration of a document by the Registering Officer. A reading of the said provision would show that the Registering Officer, prior to registration, is bound to enquire as to whether or not such document was executed by the persons by whom it purports to have been executed and also to satisfy himself as to the identity of the person appearing before him either in person or through a representative. Section 71 says that every Sub Registrar refusing to register a document shall make an order of refusal and record his reasons for such order in Book No.2. Chapter 11 of Registration Rules (Kerala) framed under Section 69(2) of the REGISTRATION ACT deals with the procedure to be adopted by the Registrar at the time of registration of the document. Rule 67 deals with the enquiry before registration. It says that it is not the duty of the Registering Officer to enquire into the validity of a document except documents styled as marriage agreement brought to him for registration or to attend any written or verbal protest against the registration of a document based on the ground that executing party had no right to execute the document. Rule 191 gives indication as to some of the circumstances under which Registrar can refuse registration. It reads thus:

“191. The reasons for refusal will usually come under one or more of the heads mentioned below; which should invariably be quoted as authority for refusal.

Section 19

I. That the document is written in a language which the Registering Officer does not understand and which is not commonly used in the district, and that it is unaccompanied by a true translation and a true copy.

Section 20

II. That it contains unattested interlineations, blanks, erasures, or alterations which in the opinion of the Registering Officer require to be attested.

Section 21(1-3) and Section 22

III. That the description of the property is insufficient to identify it.

Section 21(4)

IV. That the document is unaccompanied by a copy or copies of any map or plan which it contains.

Rule 42

V. That the date of execution is not stated in the document or that the correct date is not ascertainable.

Sections 23, 24, 25, 26, 72, 75 and 77

VI. That it is presented after the prescribed time.

Sections 32, 33, 40 and 43

VII. That it is presented by a person who has no right to present it.

Section 32A

VIIA. That the document is not affixed with the Passport size photographs and impression/impressions of the left thumb or any of the fingers in the absence of left thumb as prescribed in Rule 30A(i) and (ii).

Section 34

VIII. Th