Registration refusal based solely on non-production of original title documents infringes property rights; alternatives like affidavits and online verification are admissible for registration.

ORDER :

1. Aggrieved by the impugned Refusal Check Slip bearing Refusal No. RFL/1Tiruvallur/109/2024, dated 12.09.2024 issued by the first respondent refusing to register the Sale Deed dated 12.09.2024 executed by the petitioner in favour of one S.Yaminidevi on the ground that petitioner failed to produce her original parent documents, the petitioner has come up by way of this writ petition.

2. According to the petitioner, the property situated in Survey No.164/2A to an extent of 1947 sq. ft. Plot No.278 situated in Selliamman Nagar annex, Venmanmputhur village, Kadambathur Union, Tiruvallur District belongs to petitioner and her husband under registered Sale Deed dated 19.03.2008. It is further stated by the petitioner that, after the death of her husband, she shifted her house from Chengalpattu to Urappakkam, the title documents got misplaced and a police complaint was lodged in this regard. A CSR receipt issued by the police authorities is enclosed in typed set. The petitioner also issue a public notice on 13.04.2022(English and 14.04.2022 (Tamil) in a local daily Newspaper with regard to missing of the document.

3. Now, the petitioner and other legal heirs of her husband executed a Sale Deed in favour of one S.Yaminidevi on 12.09.2024 and the same was presented before the first respondent for registration. The first respondent refused to register the same on the ground that the the petitioner failed to produce the original title documents.

4. Mr. M. Shahjahan, learned Special Government Pleader, who takes notice for the respondents, by relying on Rule 55-A of Registration Rules framed under the REGISTRATION ACT , 1908, submitted that unless original document is produced, the Registering Authority cannot entertain registration.

5. The issue involved in this case regarding non-production of original title document was already considered by the Division Bench of the Madurai Bench of this Court in M. Ariyanatchi and another vs. Inspector General of Registration and another made in W.A. (MD) No. 856 of 2023, dated 27.06.2023 wherein the Division Bench observed as follows:-

“10. The object of Rule 55-A(i) of the Registration Rules is said to be to prevent fraudulent registrations. We are sure that Rule 55-A(i) is not a method by which fraudulent registrations could be prevented. Once the status of the executant is accepted and the ownership of the property by the predecessor-in-interest is also accepted, insistence upon production of original document, in our opinion, in cases of this nature, would only lead to empowering corruption. We must also point out that such refusal to register for non-production of original document would definitely infringe the rights guaranteed under Article 300A of the Constitution of India.

11. While dealing with the first proviso to Rule 55-A of the Registration Rules, this Court had, in the Federal Bank Ltd. vs. The Sub Registrar, Pollachi [order dated 08.02.2023 in W.P. No. 2758 of 2023], pointed out that if the Rule, which is a subordinate legislation, is in conflict with the substantive law, it will not prevail.

12. Rule 55-A(i), in our opinion, in the given circumstances, would result in infringement of proprietary right guaranteed under Article 300A of the Constitution of India. There is nothing in the substantive law, which prevents the co-owner from dealing with his / her share in the property. If the co-owner, who deals with his / her share in the property, had created encumbrance, such transfer will be subject to such encumbrance. If the other co-owner had created encumbrance, that encumbrance will be confined to the share of the other co-owner only. Therefore, en