The central legal point established in the judgment is that the Sub Registrar is duty bound to register a document after verifying its execution and cannot refuse registration without violating any rule, regulation, or law, while also emphasizing the protection of a citizen's right to own property.

1. Heard both sides.

2. By consent, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

3. No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents.

4. The main grievance of the Petitioner is that he had applied with all requisite legal formalities like purchasing of stamp papers and payment of stamp duty etc. As a matter of fact, he had requested the Second Respondent/Sub Registrar (Document Registration) Peravurani, Thanjavur District, to register the Sale Deed and release the same. However, the Second Respondent, without any authority, is not registering the document, after accepting the registration fees. (paid through Challan, dated 14.07.2016) and keeping the document, as pending one in Ref.No.P201600016.

5. The primordial stand taken on behalf of the Petitioner is that the Second Respondent/ Sub Registrar (Document Registration), Peravurani, Thanjavur District, is duty bound to register the document soon after receipt of registration charges in compliance with Sections 34, 35 and 58 to 61 of Registration Act, 1908. In this connection, the plea of the Petitioner is that under the Registration Act, 1908, the Registering Officer is duty bound to register the document, after identifying the party to the document upon verification of the execution of the document and also duty bound to return the registered document under Section 61(2) of the Act. Furthermore, the Petitioner had purchased the property, measuring an extent of 0.1.22 Acre, through the Sale Deed, 14.07.2016, from his vendor one Subbian. Indeed, the said Subbian, had purchased the said property through two Sale Deeds, bearing Document Nos.461/2011 and 916/2011, registered in the Second Respondent's Office. Since the Second Respondent is keeping the document in question, as a pending one, the Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition before this Court.

6. It is to be noted that keeping a document pending without registering the same, undoubtedly, deprives a Citizen/Petitioner of his valuable Right to Property and in fact, it is represented on behalf of the Petitioner that the scope of enquiry envisaged under the Registration Act, 1908, as regards the acceptance of documents for registration, is a limited one.

7. At this juncture, this Court points out a decision of this Court in R.G. Rathinam v. Sub-Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar, Velipattinam, Ramanathapuram Taluk and District and Another reported in 2009 (6) MLJ 844, at Special Page 845, whereby and where-under, it is observed as follows:-

“When the vendors admitted the execution, it is the duty of the Sub Registrar to receive the documents and register the same, if proper stamp duty is paid and the property is within his jurisdiction and the Sub Registrar is not expected to conduct roving enquiry regarding the title and ownership of the property who executed the document.”

8. Undoubtedly, as per the ingredients of Article 300(A) of the Constitution of India, Right of a Citizen to own a property and to retain it is well protected and such a Right, cannot be deprived by any one, except by an Authority of Law, in the considered opinion of this Court. Furthermore, a document for which registration is permissible under the Registration Act, 1908, has to be registered by the concerned Authority and the said Authority cannot wriggle out of the situation that he is in, in this regard, as opined by this Court.

9. Moreover, this Court aptly points out that it is for the registering Authority to exhibit that the registration of a document in question would be contrary to public policy and would be in negation of the relevant provisions of Law application to the case. In the absence of any violation/deviation of any Rule/Regulation/Law etc., by the Petitioner, the concerned Authority, in the eye of Law, cannot refuse to register the document, which is produced/filed before him.

10. Be that as it may, on a careful consideration of the entire conspectus of the attendant facts and circumstances of the present cas