The Registering Authority cannot refuse to register a sale deed based on title disputes; procedural compliance is sufficient for registration under the Registration Act.

JUDGMENT :

ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.

1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the Petitioner praying for quashing the impugned order dated 04.10.2025 (Annexure-12) passed by the Sub-Registrar, Khandagiri (O.P. No.3) under Section 71 of the REGISTRATION ACT , 1908 refusing to register the deed for sale (Annexure-5) of the Petitioner.

2. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State.

3. The case of the Petitioner is that, this is the 2^nd approach of the Petitioner to this Court by filing this 2nd writ petition after the final disposal of the W.P.(C) No.23547 of 2025 on dated 17.09.2025 praying for the same relief i.e. for a direction to the Sub-Registrar, Khandagiri (O.P. No.3) for registration of her deed after quashing the refusal order of registration vide Annexure-12. As per the previous order dated 19.08.2025 vide Annexure-9, the Sub-Registrar, Khandagiri (O.P. No.3) had refused to register the deed for sale (original of Annexure-5) of the Petitioner on the following grounds:-

(a) final R.o.R. of the land covered under the deed for sale has not been published in the name of the Petitioner/vendor.

(b) non-production of the R.o.R. for the satisfaction of the Registering Officer showing that, the vendor (Petitioner) has right, title and interest in the properties covered under the deed.

To which, the Petitioner challenged by filing the writ petition vide W.P.(C) No.23547 of 2025 arraying the O.Ps including the Sub-Registrar, Khandagiri as O.P. No.3.

After hearing from both the sides, that writ petition vide W.P.(C) No.23547 of 2025 was disposed of finally by this Court on dated 17.09.2025 quashing the impugned order of refusal of registration passed on dated 19.08.2025 (Annexure-9) by the Sub-Registrar, Khandagiri (O.P. No.3) and direction was given to the Sub-Registrar, Khandagiri (O.P. No.3) to register the deed for sale on the very date of its production by the Petitioner as per the REGISTRATION ACT , 1908 and the Rules thereof assigning the reasons that, “the Petitioner (vendor of the deed for sale) is the owner of the land covered under the said deed and it is not the function of the Sub-Registrar i.e. O.P. No.3 to ascertain, whether the vendor of the deed has title to the property, to which, she is seeking to transfer and when as per law, if the transferor does not have any title or has an imperfect title to the property, the transferee on transfer will either get no title or will get an imperfect title, this will be to the prejudice of the transferee and the same is not the concerned of the Registering Authority, but, the Registering Authority is bound to register the deed.

When the Registering Officer has no jurisdiction to enquire into the consequential legal effect as well as merit of the deed in question presented for registration and the Registering Officer has no jurisdiction to refuse the registration of the deed expressing opinion on the merits of the title in that deed and the matter concerning the title in the deed in question comes under the jurisdiction of the Civil Court, but, not within the jurisdiction of the Sub- Registrar, Khandagiri (O.P. No.3), then, the order of refusal of registration passed on 19.08.2025 (Annexure-9) by the Sub-Registrar, Khandagiri (O.P. No.3) was not legal, for which, the same was quashed and the O.P. No.3 was directed to register the deed for sale of the Petitioner.”

4. After the final order dated 17.09.2025 passed in W.P.(C) No.23547 of 2025