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) 42109

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J
Balamurugan – Appellant
Versus
District Registrar – Respondent
W.P(MD)No.13898 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: A. Rajaram
For the Respondents: M. Gangatharan, K. Gnanasekaran

Registration of a document without the original parent document is permissible if a non-traceable certificate is obtained from the police following an investigation.

Headnote:This petition involves the refusal by registration authorities to register a settlement deed due to the absence of the parent document, purportedly required under Section 34C of the Registration Act, 1908. The petitioner contended that original documents were lost and a police complaint had been filed, though a non-traceable certificate remained pending. The Court noted that in the absence of original documents, the issuance of a non-traceable certificate by the police is a prerequisite for proceeding with registration. The primary issue concerns whether the registration of a settlement deed can proceed in the absence of title documents upon submission of a non-traceable certificate. The Court reasoned that once a non-traceable certificate is obtained through due process of investigation by the police, the impediment to registration is removed, allowing the registration authority to proceed with the documentary processing. The Writ Petition was disposed of with a direction to the third respondent police to process the complaint and issue a non-traceable certificate if documents cannot be located, enabling the petitioner to re-present the deed for registration.

Table of Content
1. failure to produce parent documents under section 34c of the registration act. (Para 1 , 2)
2. directing police to issue non-traceable certificates to facilitate registration of documents. (Para 3)

ORDER

The Writ Petition challenges the impugned refusal check slip dated

08.04.2026.

2. When the petitioner presented a settlement deed for registration, the same is now refused on the ground that the parent document that is relied upon for the purpose of tracing the title is not produced as per section 34C of the Registration Act, 1908. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the said documents are missing, and already a complaint is lodged to the third respondent. Till date, they are not issuing the non-traceable certificate.

3. After considering the submissions made, the third respondent police is directed to make an attempt to trace the document and, if the document is not traceable by following the due process, issue a non-traceable certificate by following the timeline in that regard. Let the complaint dated 02.04.2026 be processed in the manner known to law and ultimately if the documents are not traced, let a non-traceable certificate be issued. Thereafter, the petitioner can represent the document along with the non-traceable certificate and upon such representation the same shall be registered if there is no other impediment. 4. With the above observations and directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

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