Refusal to register a sale deed was unlawful as the land was not subject to layout conversion requirements under Section 22-A(2).

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY W.P.No.20923 of 2025 S.Soodamani ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Registrar, District Registrar Office, Dharmapuri District. 2.The Sub-Registrar, Dharmapuri West, Dharmapuri District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings dated 13.05.2025 made in refusal check slip in RFL/Dharmapuri West/52/2025 issued by the second respondent quash the same as illegal, improper, unreasonable, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and thereby direct the second respondent to register the sale deed dated 13.05.2025 (No.TP/218578301/2025) presented by the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Sundarapandiyan For Respondents : Mr.Abishek Murthy, Government Advocate

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings dated 13.05.2025 made in refusal check slip in RFL/Dharmapuri West/52/2025 issued by the second respondent quash the same as illegal, improper, unreasonable, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and thereby direct the second respondent to register the sale deed dated 13.05.2025 (No.TP/218578301/2025)

presented by the petitioner.

2. Mr.Abishek Murthy, learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner presented the sale deed for registration before the respondents. However, the second respondent refused to register the same, asking the petitioner to produce no objection certificate from the concern authority for the land in Survey No.207/2C is not included in the house site layout or the land is not allotted for common purpose.

4. He would further submit that the subject land is neither a plot nor a public utility land. It is an agricultural land and since the petitioner has already own 6.5 acres of land adjacent to the subject land, the petitioner purchased another 8.5 cents of land in order to use the same as private pathway.

5. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would submit that after the purchase of 8.5 cents of land, the petitioner formed a new road in the said land. In the event of forming the road in the said land, they cannot register the same and it would be considered as plots. Therefore, bar under Section 22A of the Registration Act, 1908 will come into picture.

6. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

7. In the present case, the second respondent refused to register the sale deed, asking the petitioner to produce no objection certificate from the concern authority for the land in Survey No.207/2C is not included in the house site layout or the land is not allotted for common purpose, since the petitioner has formed new roads in the subject land, subsequent to the purchase. In the event, he is forming the road with an intention to making it as plots, then certainly, he has to get approval from the authorities concerned. At this juncture, it is pertinent to extract Section

22-A(2) of the Registration Act, 1908 and the same reads as follows:

22-A-Refusal to register certain documents.-

Notwithstanding anything that contained in the Act, the registering officer shall refuse to register any of the following documents, namely:-

---

(2) instrument relating to the transfer of ownership of lands converted as house sites without the permission for development of such land from planning authority concerned:

Provided that the house sites without such permission may be register