Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J
N. Sulaika Beevi – Appellant
Versus
District Registrar, Ramanathapuram District – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. submission on rule 55a (Para 4) |
| 2. insistence on original documents (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. writ petition allowed (Para 10) |
ORDER :
2. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.
4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.271 of 2024 dated 25.03.2024 held that the first proviso to Rule 55 A of the Tamil Nadu Registration Rules, 2000 is not at all declared as ultravires by this Court. The provisos to Rule 55 A are intact in Rule Books and therefore, it is to be complied scrupulously, whenever documents are presented for registration. Further, the second and third provisos to Rule 55A of the Registration Rules enumerates procedures to be followed in the event of non-availability of revenue records to be produced for registration. The presentant of a document is bound to comply with the conditions stipulated in Rule 55A for registering a document under the Registration Act.
6. In the case of N. Ramayee vs. The Sub Registrar,
The court held that the refusal to register a sale deed based on the non-production of original documents is arbitrary and not supported by law, allowing registration based on certified copies.
The court ruled that the requirement for original documents for property registration is not absolute and must comply with statutory provisions, emphasizing the right to deal with property.
The court ruled that registration of a sale deed cannot be denied solely for lack of original documents when certified copies are available, emphasizing the right to deal with property.
The insistence on original documents for property registration is arbitrary; certified copies suffice for verification, aligning with constitutional property rights.
The court ruled that insisting on original documents for property registration is arbitrary and violates the constitutional right to deal with property, as per the Transfer of Property Act.
Court ruled that registration of sale deeds cannot be arbitrarily refused for lack of production of original documents when copies are provided and verified.
The court affirmed that a registrar cannot refuse to register a sale deed based solely on the absence of original parent documents, reinforcing property owners' rights and the authority of case law o....
The court ruled that a sale deed cannot be denied registration solely for lack of original documents when certified copies are available, affirming the rights to transfer property under the Transfer ....
Subsequent transfers of property hold validity even in absence of original documents, provided sufficient certification or verification can be performed.
The refusal to register a sale deed based solely on the absence of an original parent document is arbitrary and against legal principles regarding property transfer registration.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
