The registration authority is bound by law to register documents if the principal is alive, regardless of disputes regarding signatures in associated life certificates.

ORDER

Heard both sides.

2.The respondents 2 & 3 herein executed the power of attorney dated

10.08.2016 in favour of the first petitioner herein authorizing him to deal with the petition mentioned property. The power of attorney was registered as Document No.2033 of 2016 on the file of the Sub Registrar, Kariyapatti. The power of attorney was one coupled with interest. In fact, stamp duty was also paid accordingly. The second respondent herein had also entered into a sale agreement with the first petitioner. While so, the first petitioner executed the petition mentioned sale deed in favour of the second petitioner and presented the same for registration. The respondents 2 & 3 raised objections. The stand of R2 & R3 is that in the life certificate produced by the first petitioner, they had not affixed their signatures. Citing the said objection, the first respondent declined to register the document and issued the impugned refusal check slip.

Challenging the same, this writ petition came to be filed.

3.The document cancelling the power of attorney was presented on

23.07.2025. The sale deed is dated 03.07.2025. But it was presented on 09.09.2025. The sale deed had been executed with stamp papers that bear the date 30.06.2025. The respondents 2 & 3 have in the meanwhile instituted O.S.No.313 to 321 of 2025 on the file of the Sub Judge, Aruppukottai seeking declaration that the power of attorney executed in favour of the first petitioner is non-est in the eyes of law and is deemed to have been cancelled. Admittedly, the jurisdictional civil Court has not granted any interim order in favour of R2 & R3 herein till date.

4.The respondents 2 & 3 herein have disputed the genuineness of the signatures attributed to them in the life certificate. The question that calls for consideration is whether the registering authority should be restrained from registering the document in view of the aforesaid stand taken by the principals.

5.A Circular was issued on 04.04.2013 by the I.G of Registration wherein it was made mandatory to insist on production of life certificate whenever a power agent executes any document pursuant to the power of attorney executed in his favour. The life certificate must indicate that the principal was alive for a period of thirty days prior to the execution of the document presented for registration. The circular is as follows :

The validity of the circular was upheld by the Hon'ble Division Bench in the decision reported in 2015 SCC OnLine Mad 13145 and 2014 SCC OnLine Mad 12788. The matter in fact went up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court as there was an ambiguity in the wording of the circular. The Hon'ble Supreme Court after clarifying what the circular should be taken to mean declined to interfere with the order of the Division Bench. Pursuant to the said clarification, the following circular was issued :

6.A learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 21.02.2025 in Arihabt Foundations and Housing Limited vs The State of Tamil Nadu made in WP. No.4780 of 2025 held as follows:

“8.In the considered view of this Court, the very insistence of a life certificate is only to ensure that the principal who executed the power is alive. The scope of the life certificate cannot go beyond this. If the principal wants to prevent the agent from dealing with the property pursuant to the power of attorney executed in his favour, the principal has to cancel the power or the principal must approach the competent Court and workout the remedy... This Circular does not have anything to do with an int