SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 38471

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D.Bharatha Chakravarthy, J
C.Petchimuthu – Appellant
Versus
Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar, Keezhur, Tuticorin District – Respondent
W.M.P.(MD)No.8588 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.K.Surya for M/s.Roy and Roy Associates
For the Respondents: Mr.A.Baskaran Additional Government Pleader

Sub-Registrar cannot refuse registration citing prior sale agreement; requires original or non-traceable certificate under S.34-C.

Headnote:The petitioner challenged a refusal check slip issued by the Sub-Registrar under Section 34-C of the Registration (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 2025, for not producing the original parent document and citing a prior pending sale agreement. The court found the prior agreement irrelevant for refusal, as any violation is for the prior holder to pursue via specific performance. Section 34-C mandates original documents or non-traceable certificate for registration. The issues framed were whether prior agreement and lack of original document justify refusal. The ratio decidendi holds that Sub-Registrar cannot refuse based on prior uncancelled agreements; registration requires originals or non-traceable certificates per Section 34-C. The Writ Petition is allowed; refusal set aside; petitioner directed to represent document with non-traceable certificate or originals for registration if no other impediments.

Table of Content
1. challenges to refusal based on prior agreement and missing original. (Para 2 , 3)
2. section 34-c requires original or non-traceable certificate. (Para 4)
3. prior agreement not grounds for sub-registrar refusal. (Para 6)

ORDER

The Writ Petition is filed challenging the impugned refusal check slip dated 10.03.2026.

2. The petitioner presented a sale agreement. The same is now refused to be registered on two grounds. Firstly, it is stated that there is a prior sale agreement, which remains pending and it has not been cancelled. The second reason that is mentioned is that the petitioner has not produced the original of the parent document relied upon by the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that both the reasons are unsustainable.

4. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondent would submit that in view of Section 34-C of the Registration (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 2025, without production of the original document or non-traceable certificate, the registration cannot be effected. 5. I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the material records of the case.

6. As far as the ground that the present sale agreement is the second sale agreement and the first agreement is pending is concerned, the same will not come within the realm for the Sub-Registrar to refuse. If the petitioner has violated the earlier agreement and sold the property, it is for the earlier agreement holder to take such steps for specific performance in his favour and the same cannot be a reason for refusal of the document. As far as the production of original is concerned, as on date since Section 34-C of the Act is in force, the petitioner has to either produce the original documents or, if the original documents are lost, he has to approach the jurisdictional police and get a non-traceable certificate and produce the same before the Sub Registrar for the purpose of registration. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner will take such steps to obtain non-traceable certificate and thereafter represent the document.

7. In view thereof, this Writ Petition is allowed on the following terms:

(i) The impugned refusal check slip, dated 10.03.2026, shall stand set aside;

(ii) The petitioner shall represent the document along with non-traceable certificate or original parent deeds, if they are traced and thereafter, the document shall be registered, if there is no other impediment.

No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top