Judgment :- 1. The petitioner is a co-operative society. It is registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (Act 21 of 1969), hereinafter referred to as the Act, for the purpose of providing irrigation facilities for the cultivators within its jurisdiction. One of the objects of the Society is to grant loans to its members. As per S.36 of the Act, a member who applies for a loan to the Society will have to give a declaration in Form VII creating a charge on the land owned or held by him to enable him to secure the amount to be advanced. The declarations made by its members, who had applied for loans were sent by the Society by registered post to the first respondent, namely, the Sub Registrar, Ettumanoor, within whose jurisdiction the lands are situated. S.36(vi) of the Act permits this procedure On receipt of the registered letter, the Sub Registrar informed the society as per Ext. P2 that the documents could be registered only if the party appeared before him for registration. The first respondent apparently relies upon R.29(iii) of the Registration Rules (Kerala), which prohibits acceptance of a document seat by post. In this writ petition, the prayer is for a writ or mandamus to direct the respondents, the Sub Registrar, and the Inspector of Registration, to register the declaration sent by post. 2. According to the State, the stand taken by the Registrar can be justified with reference to the various sections in the Indian Registration Act. 3. The question for determination in this writ petition is, whether the Sub Registrar can be compelled to register the documents sent by post by a Cooperative Society under S.36 (vi) of the Act or whether the Sub Registrar is justified in his stand that the party should appear is person before him. 4. R.29 (iii) of the Registration Rules (Kerala), framed under the Indian Registration Act, reads as follows: "29. (iii) A document shall not be accepted if transmitted by post." This rule prohibits the Registrar from accepting the document sent by post. But S.36 (vi) of the Act enables a co-operative Society to send the declarations by registered post. 4. R.29 (iii) of the Registration Rules (Kerala), framed under the Indian Registration Act, reads as follows: "29. (iii) A document shall not be accepted if transmitted by post." This rule prohibits the Registrar from accepting the document sent by post. But S.36 (vi) of the Act enables a co-operative Society to send the declarations by registered post. S 36 (vi) reads as follows: "(vi) a declaration made under clause (i) or any 'variation or cancellation thereof under clause (ii) or any release under the third proviso to clause (iii) shall be sent by the society, by registered post, to the Sub Registrar having jurisdiction over the area in which the land is situate, and the Sub Registrar shall register such declaration or variation or cancellation or release and issue a copy thereof to the society:" The question can be easily resolved if S.36(vi) of the Act and the relevant provisions of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, are harmoniously construed. 5. For the registration of a document under the Indian Registration Act, the following conditions have to be satisfied: [i] Presentation of the document in the proper time in the office by the proper person. [ii] Appearing of the person executing the document before the Registering Officer within the proper time. [iii] Enquiry by the Registering Officer under S.34[3], [iv] Obtaining signature of the person admitting execution after proper identification. and [v] Endorsements under S.52 and copying the endorsements. "Registered" under S 3 of the Transfer of Property Act means registered under law for the time being in force regulating the registration of documents. Unless a document is registered under the provisions of the Registration Act, a document cannot be said to be registered, to have the necessary legal authority, flowing out of it. S.36 (vi) of the Act cannot be said to have overriding effect over the provisions of the Registration Act. 6. On a proper consideration of the relevant provisions of the Indian Registration Act, it becomes clear that S.36 (vi) of the Act can, at best, operate only as a proviso to these sections. It cannot be disputed that when there is a conflict between a Central law and a State law, on the same subject, the Central law should prevail S 36 (vi) of the Act, perhaps, exempts a cooperative society from the obligation of presenting the document in person. It cannot be disputed that when there is a conflict between a Central law and a State law, on the same subject, the Central law should prevail S 36 (vi) of the Act, perhaps, exempts a cooperative society from the obligation of presenting the document in person. This does rot mean that S.36 (vi) of the Act exempts the person from the other obligations under the Indian Registration Act. S 36 (vi) removes the rigour of the first condition. All the other conditions are to be satisfied. 7. R.29 (iii) of the Registration Rules is a rule made by the State of Kerala. This rule and S 36 (vi) of the Act have to be read together. S.36 (vi) should be read as an exception to R.29 (iii) of the Kerala Registration Rules. Even then all the other formalities in the Indian Registration Act are to be complied with The first respondent is therefore justified in refusing to register the document Under the circumstances, no writ can issue to the first respondent. 8. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. Since there is an apparent conflict between the sections of the Registration Act, R.29 (iii) of the Registration Rules (Kerala) and S.36 (vi) of the Cooperative Societies Act, it would be advisable for the Government to clarity the apparent inconsistency between R.29 (iii) and S.36 (vi) and make the position clear by appropriate action. A copy of the judgment will be sent to the Chief Secretary to the Government of Kerala, under the seal of the High Court and signature of the Registrar. Dismissed.