Validity of cancellation deed under the Registration Act, consent of all parties for cancellation, and the obligation of the Registering Officer to reject unilateral cancellation without consent.

(Prayer: Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Certiorified mandamus, to call for the records of the impugned deed of cancellation of sale deed as document No.1371 of 2007 and settlement deed dated 25.06.2007 as document No.1372 of 2007 on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and grant such other relieves).

Heard both sides.

2. According to the petitioners, their brothers are the owners of the lands comprised in Survey No.1915 of an extent of 0.32.0 acres, Survey No.1914/1, of extent of 0.19.0 acres, Survey No.1914/2, of an extent of 0.10.5, Survey No.1914/3 of an extent of 0.08.5 acres, in Thenkarai village, Periakulam Taluk, Theni District and they got the same under partition in their family. The petitioners purchased the said properties from the said M.Palanichamy, under a registered sale deed dated 18.06.2007 for valid consideration and the sale deed was registered with the 1st respondent as document No.1331 of 2007.

3. According to the petitioners, at the time of execution of the sale deed, one Mohamed Ali, who was working in the office of the 1st respondent, obtained their signatures in blank papers stating that those signatures were necessary for registration. Later, they came to know that their vendor, Mr.M.Palanichamy, executed a deed of cancellation dated 25.06.2007, cancelling the sale deed executed by him in favour of the petitioners, which was registered as document No.1331 of 2007 and the 1st respondent registered the cancellation deed as document No.1371 of 2007. On the very same day, the petitioners vendor also executed a settlement deed in favour of his two minor daughters and the same was also registered as document No.1372 of 2007 in favour of the same properties. Therefore, the petitioners sent representation, dated 25.02.2009 to the 1st respondent to validate their sale deed, dated 18.06.2007 and cancelling the cancellation deed and settlement deed. As no action has been taken by the 1st respondent, this writ petition is filed by the petitioners for the relief stated above.

4. Mr.K.Balasundaram, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the Sub Registrar should not have registered the cancellation deed as after executing a sale deed, the executant viz., the vendor lost all his rights over the property and hence, cancellation is not valid in law.

5. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, as per judgment of this Honourable Court reported in 2009(1)CTC 709 in the case of G.D.Subramaniam vs.1.The Sub-Registrar, Office of Konur Sub-Registrar, Sidco Nagar, Chennai-49, 2.P.Shanmugam 3. Mr.B.Dillibabu 4.Mr.B.Vasu., the unilateral cancellation is not valid in law.

6. The learned Special Government Pleader, Mr.Pala Ramasamy, appearing for the 1st respondent, filed the counter affidavit and also the typed set of papers stating that the cancellation deed was executed at the instance of the executant viz., Mr.M.Palanichamy and at that time, the petitioners were present and the Sub Registrar after satisfying himself, by conducting enquiry with the petitioners during the said enquiry, the petitioners expressed no objection for the cancellation of the sale deed executed in their favour by Mr.M.Palanichamy and after getting their consent in writing, admitted the document of cancellation for registration and registered the cancellation deed and the petitioners have also signed as attesting witnesses in that document. Therefore, according to the learned counsel for the 1st respondent with the consent of all the parties, the cancellation deed was registered, which is perfectly valid in law and therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to the relief as prayed for.

7. In this case, it is admitted that under document No.1331 of 2007, the petitioners vendor, Mr.M.Palanichamy executed the sale deed in favour of the petitioners. Thereafter, he executed the cancellation de