The sale of the property under attachment is void only as against the claims enforceable under the attachment and not in respect of other claims.

1. This writ petition is filed for a direction to the 1st respondent to register a sale deed which is pending before the respondent as P-123 of 2011 dated 28.6.2011 and to return the same to the petitioner, after registration.

2. Case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows:

(a) Petitioner is a Private Limited Company incorporated under the provisions of Indian Companies Act. Petitioner Company purchased 82.27 acres of land and building comprising R.S.No.326/3, New R.S.No.31/6A in Arapalayam Village, Madurai South Registration District from M/s.Sri Mappillai Vinayagar Soda Factory and M/s.Sri Mappillai Vinayagar Cine Complex, which are the partnership firms. The document was executed on 28.06.2011 and when it was presented for registration before the 1st respondent, the 1st respondent initially refused to receive the document for registration stating that the property is under attachment pursuant to an order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal at Madurai in I.A.No.831 of 2008 in O.A.No.100 of 2008. The representatives of the purchaser informed the 1st respondent that they are purchasing the property knowing the order of attachment and that their rights over the property would be subject to the attachment.

(b) Thereafter, the 1st respondent insisted the petitioners' representatives to give a letter of undertaking stating that the purchaser will not claim the document till the attachment is raised and that the document could be registered as pending registration. The petitioner was forced to give such an undertaking as it had parted with a sum of Rs.7.00 crores towards sale consideration of the property and that the vendors' representatives may not be readily available for registration of the document in another day.

(c) The 1st respondent has no right to get such an undertaking and keep the document as pending. By letter dated 07.02.2012, the petitioner requested the 1st respondent to return the document after registering the same. However, they are keeping the document without registering the same. The order of attachment issued by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Madurai will not prevent the 1st respondent from registering the document. The petitioner will get right over the property subject to the charge created pursuant to the attachment made by the Debts Recovery Tribunal in I.A.No.831 of 2008 in O.A.No.100 of 2008. If the 1st respondent is not directed to register the document, the petitioner would be put to irreparable loss. Hence, the writ petition.

3. Resisting the said averments, the 1st respondent filed a counter affidavit inter alia stating that when the parties to the document came to know the attachment of the property ordered by the Debts Recovery Tribunal at Madurai on 12.09.1998 in I.A.No.831 of 2008, the petitioners themselves gave a petition for keeping the document 'pending registration' till the attachment is raised. Accordingly, the impugned document was kept 'pending registration' after making necessary endorsement. When the petitioner gave a petition on 07.02.2012 for release of the document, they were informed by a letter dated 29.02.2012 that the document continues to be pending because of non-receipt of any order raising the attachment against the property.

4. It is further stated that the petition filed by the vendors of the property in I.A.No.693 of 2009 to raise the interim order of attachment passed in I.A.No.831 of 2008 by the Debts Recovery Tribunal was dismissed as devoid of merits and not sustainable and thus, the order of attachment was made absolute by the Debts Recovery Tribunal at Madurai, by order, dated 30.09.2011 not satisfying with the substituted security offered by them in I.A.Nos.831 of 2008 and I.A.No.693/2009. The property has been placed under attachment by the Commercial Tax Officer, West Veli Street, Madurai also in his Order dated 29.10.2007 for non-payment of a demand of Rs.61,16,921/-and the attachment is still in existence as per the records of the 1st responden