2023:MHC:3146 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 04.07.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.32479 of 2017 Mrs.Sarojini Sakuntala ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome, Chennai.

2.The Sub-Registrar, Periyanayakanpalayam, Coimbatore – 641 020.

3.Mr.Y.SiluvaiPitchai ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring that the registration of the deed of cancellation of the settlement deed dated 27.12.2010 registered as Document No.15197/2010 on the file of the 2^nd respondent in respect of property bearing Survey No.173 measuring about 2376 sq.ft in Nilagiri Garden situated at Pilichi Village, Coimbatore North Taluk, Coimbatore District is illegal and against the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.N.Rajagopalan for M/s.K.S.R.Anirudha (in all W.Ps)

For R1 & R2 : Mr.C.Jayaprakash, Government Advocate For R3 : Mr.A.Sivaji

O R D E R

The writ on hand has been instituted for declaration of the registration of the deed of cancellation of the settlement deed dated dated 27.12.2010 registered as Document No.15197/2010 on the file of the 2^nd respondent as null and void.

2. The petitioner states that the 3^rd respondent is her husband, who in turn settled the subject property in her name through settlement deed. On account of a family dispute, after a lapse of one year, the writ petitioner has approached the Court seeking maintenance and in view of the same, the 3^rd respondent had unilaterally cancelled the settlement deed executed in favour of the writ petitioner.

3. Settlement deed cannot be cancelled unilaterally in view of the principles laid down in the Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court in the case of Latif Estate Line India Ltd. -vs- Hadeeja Amma reported in [(2011) 2 CTC 1] as follows:-

“ 48. Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act defined the word “Sale”, which means transfer of ownership by one person to another. In other words, sale is transfer of all rights, title and interest in the properties which are possessed by the transferor to another person namely, the purchaser. In case of transfer by way of sale, the transferor cannot retain any part of his interest or right in that property. Such transfer of ownership must be for a price paid or promised or part- paid and part-promised. Even if the whole price is not paid, but the document is executed and registered, the sale would be complete. The transfer is complete and effective upon the completion of the registration of the Sale Deed. Once the vendor is divested himself of his ownership of the property, then he retains no control or right over the said property.

....

54. There is no provision in the Transfer of Property Act or in the Registration Act, which deals with the cancellation of Deed of Sale. The reason according to us is that the execution of a Deed of Cancellation by the vendor does not create, assign, limit or extinguish any right, title or interest in the immovable property and the same has no effect in the eye of law. A provision relating to the cancellation of a document is provided in Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (Old Section 39). Section 31 reads as under:

“31. When cancellation may be ordered.—

(1) Any person against whom a written instrument is void or voidable, and who has reasonable apprehension that such instrument, if left outstanding, may cause him serious injury, may sue to have it adjudged void or voidable, and the Court may, in its discretion, so adjudge it and order it to be delivered up and cancelled.

(2) If the instrument has been registered under the Indian Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908), the Court shall also send a copy of its decree to the officer in whose office the instrument has been so registered; and such officer shall note on the copy of the instrument contained in his books the fact of its cancellation.”

55. From the reading of the aforesaid provision, it