The Sub Registrar must register a sale deed if procedural requirements are met, regardless of title disputes, as they lack adjudicative authority regarding ownership.

JUDGMENT :

(J. NISHA BANU, J.)

This Writ Appeal is directed against the order passed by the Writ Court dated 04.11.2024 passed in WP(MD)No.26401 of 2024.

2. The facts leading to the filing of this writ appeal are as follows:

The properties in S.Nos.219/15, 219/16, 219/18, 219/19, 219/20 and 219/21A totally having an extent of 3.08.50 Hectares (7.62 Acres) situated at Irungalur Village, Mannachanallur Taluk, Trichy District, belong to 15 persons and they were already issued with patta. The respondent/writ petitioner intended to purchase the subject properties and a sale deed was also executed in his favour. Though the document was presented for registration on three occasions, it was returned on the ground that the subject properties belong to Kalaimagal Saba and no one has right to deal with the subject properties, since Kalaimagal Saba is under liquidation. According to the respondent, in order to grab the subject properties, a fictitious sale deed was registered by impersonating the original owner in favour of Kalaimagal Saba, Kumarapalayam. In pursuant to the said sale deed, Kalaimagal Saba claimed title over the subject properties. Immediately, the original owner of the properties lodged a complaint and during enquiry, Kalaimagal Saba themselves admitted that they had been cheated by unknown persons by impersonating the original owner of the properties and also handed over the fictitious sale deed dated 26.03.1992 to the original owner. Subsequently, the original owner had executed settlement deeds and sale deeds in respect of the subject properties to various persons. Now, the vendors of the respondent numbering to 15 persons, have title over the subject properties on receipt of various sale consideration and all the revenue records were also mutated in favour of the respondent's vendors. Therefore, the respondent's vendors have valid title over the subject properties. However, the appellant refused to register the document presented by the respondent. Hence, the respondent filed the writ petition. The Writ Court relying upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of N.Ramayee vs. Sub Registrar, Registration Department and another reported in 2020 (5) LW 385 , held that that the appellant has no power to refuse to register the subsequent document, on the basis of the agreement of sale, which was already registered in respect of the very same property. Accordingly, the Writ Court had directed the respondent to re-present the sale deed, which was executed in his favour within a period of one week with a further direction to the appellant to register and release the document within a period of one week thereafter. As against the said order, the Sub Registrar has filed this appeal.

3. The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the appellant would contend that Kalaimagal Sabha was registered and commenced its activities with an object of collecting deposits and returning the same along with interest by conducting certain real estate business. Huge amount of money was collected from its 5,33,356 members. The money collected were invested in purchase of immovable properties not only across the State of Tamil Nadu, but also in other States. Since Kalaimagal Sabha committed certain irregularities and mismanagement in dealing with the funds of the society and when the Government of Tamil Nadu proposed to appoint a Special Officer to manage the affairs of the Society, a writ petition in W.P.No.514 of 1999 was filed seeking to appoint a retired High Court Judge as the custodian to take control of funds and assets of