The power to declare a registered document as fraudulently registered deeds lies with the Civil Court and not the registering authority.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: WritPetition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to consider the 1st petitioner''s representations dated 18.07.2022 and 20.02.2023 and cancel the sale deed Document No.17460/2021 registered dated 05.08.2021 and the same document No.17460/2021 which was refused to register earlier by the 2nd respondent dated 10.05.2019 on the file of the 2nd respondent on the grounds of fraud.

1. The writ petition has been filed for directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to consider the 1st petitioner''s representations dated 18.07.2022 and 20.02.2023 and cancel the sale deed Document No.17460/2021 registered dated 05.08.2021 and the same document No.17460/2021, which was refused to register earlier by the 2nd respondent dated 10.05.2019 on the file of the 2nd respondent on the grounds of fraud.

2. The learned Additional Government Pleaderappearing for respondents 1 and 2 mainly contended that the District Registrar, Puducherry, has no jurisdiction to declare the registered document as fraudulent or cancel the document. The powers exercised by the District Registrar, Puducherry, is without jurisdiction and therefore, the writ petition is not entertainable.

3. Since the learned counsel for the petitioners state that he is mainly on the ground of jurisdiction, this Court is inclined to go into the grounds raised in this regard.

4. It is contended that the sale deed was registered vide Document No.17460 of 2021 dated 05.08.2021, Power of Attorney in Document No.2487 of 2015 dated 05.10.2021.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted representations dated 18.07.2022 and 20.02.2023 to the District Registrar to declare the documents registered at the instance of the respondents as fraudulent. However, there is no specific order cancelling the sale deeds registered by the respondents.

6. The powers of the Registering Authority under the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908, to cancel the registered documents are well enumerated by the three Judge Bench of the Hon''ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Satya Pal Anand vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others, reported in (2016) 10 SCC 767. The Relevant portion of said Judgment reads as under:-

“34. The role of the Sub-Registrar (Registration) stands discharged, once the documents is registered (see Raja Mohammad Amir Ahmad Khan) Section 17 of the 1908 Act deals with documents which require compulsory registration. Extinguishment deed is one such document referred to in Section 17 (1) (b). Section 18 of the same Act deals with documents, registration whereof is optional. Section 20 of the Act deals with documents containing interlineations, blanks, erasures or alterations. Section 21 provides for description of property and maps or plans and Section 22 deals with the description of houses and land by reference to government maps and surveys. There is no express provision in the 1908 Act which empowers the Registrar to recall such registration. The fact whether the document was properly presented for registration cannot be reopened by the Registrar after its registration. The power to cancel the registration is a substantive matter. In absence of any express provision in that behalf, it is not open to assume that the Sub-Registrar (Registration) would be competent to cancel the registration of the documents in question. Similarly, the power of the Inspector General is limited to do superintendence of Registration Offices and make rules in that behalf. Even the Inspector General has no power to cancel the registration of any document which has already been registered.”

7. Admittedly, there is no power provided under the Registration Act, 1908, for the District Registrar to cancel the document unlike Tamil Nadu amendment.

8. Perusal of the findings made by the District Registrar would reveal that he had gone into the details of the documents presented between the parties and consi