IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P. V. BALAKRISHNAN, J.
Alavikutty. T. K – Petitioner
Versus
State Of Kerala, Represented By The Secretary To Government, Registration Department – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 40794 OF 2024
Decided On : 11-03-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's background and mortgage history (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. dispute over superintending engineer's presence (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. interpretation of section 88 of registration act (Para 6 , 7) |
JUDGMENT :
P. V. BALAKRISHNAN, J.
This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent not to insist upon the appearance of the Superintending Engineer of Tamilnadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., who was the employer of the petitioner, for the purpose of registration of a release mortgage/gahan deed in respect of his property.
2. The petitioner, who is a permanent resident of Nilambur Taluk in Malappuram District, was employed as a Commercial Inspector in Chennai Division of Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (Tamil Nadu Electricity Board) (for short, ‘TNEB’). In order to construct a residential building, the petitioner mortgaged his property having an extent of 10 cents of land in Re.Sy.No.879/Pt with the TNEB, in the year 2007. Subsequently, the petitioner also availed another loan for improvement of his residence. The petitioner thus executed two mortgage deeds as document Nos.5758/2007 and 4895/2013 before the 2nd respondent, Sub Registrar, for the said purpose. Thereafter, the petitioner cleared the entire loan amount and the creditor acknowledged the same as per Ext.P2. But when the petitioner presented Ext.P2 before the 2nd respondent, along with Ext.P3, the 2nd respondent informed the petitioner, as per Ext.P3 that the executant of the document, who is the Superintending Engineer of TNEB, is required to be present before him and that the petitioner is also required to pay the stamp duty for registration of the gahan release. It is in such circumstances that the petitioner approached this Court by filing this writ petition.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the 2nd respondent cannot insist on the presence of the Superintending Engineer of TNEB for executing the document pertaining to release of mortgage/gahan since, Ext.P3 shows that he is an exempted officer falling under Section 88 of the Registration Act, 1908. He also submitted that, due to the act of the 2nd respondent, the petitioner is put to task and is facing much difficulty in dealing with the properties.
5. The learned Government Pleader submitted that, as per Section 32 of the Registration Act, the person executing the document, or any of his representatives duly authorised, has to be compulsorily present at the time of registration and that the Superintending Engineer of TNEB cannot be considered as an officer falling under the exempted group under Section 88 (1) of the Registration Act since, the notification relied on is not issued by the State of Kerala.
6. On an anxious consideration of the rival submissions and the materials on record, I find considerable force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Section 88 (1) of the Registration Act, 1908 reads as follows:-
“ Section 88 . Registration of documents executed by Government officers or certain public functionaries.—(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, it shall not be necessary for,—
(a) any officer of Government, or
(b) any Administrator-General, Official Trustee or Official Assignee, or
(c) the Sheriff, Receiver or Registrar of a High Court, or
(d) the holder for the time being of such other public office as may be specified in a notification in the Official Gazette issued in that behalf by the State Government, to appear in person or by agent at any registration office in any proceeding connected with the registration of any instrument executed by him or in his favour, in his official capacity, or to sign as provided in section 58.”
7. A reading of this Section shows that it exempts certain category of persons from appearance for registration. Ap
Exempted government officers under Section 88 of the Registration Act are not required to appear personally for document registration, irrespective of the state jurisdiction.
(1) Challenge to very execution of a document, is a challenge to its very DNA and any defect or illegality on execution, is congenital in nature.(2) Examining whether Registering Authority did someth....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the role of a registering officer is purely administrative and they are not entitled to examine the legality and validity of a document presen....
A petitioner must comply with statutory requirements for document registration, and failure to provide evidence of proper presentation can lead to dismissal of the writ petition.
A registered power of attorney holder can present a deed for registration without the principal's presence, as the Registration Act mandates registration when properly executed.
The registration of a deed after the death of the executant does not, by itself, render it forged or provide sufficient grounds for acquitting the accused of all charges under Sections 420/468/471 of....
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.