Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 1252 (JHR)

RAM KUMAR PRASAD v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

2003-10-15

M.Y.EQBAL

body2003
Judgment : M. Y. EQBAL, J. ( 1 ) HEARD the counsel for the parties. ( 2 ) THE petitioner has moved this Court against the arbitrary action of the Sub-Registrar, Ranchi before whom a document in the shape of sale deed was presented for registration but the Sub-Registrar retained the document without admitting the execution and registration of the document. ( 3 ) ON 18-9-2003 this matter was heard and following order was passed :"put up this case on 14-10-2003 to enable the respondents to file counter affidavit. The Sub-registrar shall personally swear the affidavit and State as to under what authority of law he has refused to register the deed presented by the petitioner. The Registrar shall also produce all the sale deeds executed and registered on 30-7-2003 by his sub-registry in respect of the properties situated within the district of Ranchi. " ( 4 ) IN the counter affidavit filed by the Sub-Registrar it is stated that the document pertaining to sale was presented by the petitioner on 30-7-2003 but the same has neither been impounded nor its registration has been refused by him. On the contrary the sub-Registrar made a correspondence with the District Land Acquisition Officer, ranchi in view of the direction made to him vide office letter no. 59 (ii) dated 14-2-2002. In the said letter it was mentioned that the land which is the subject matter of transfer, was proposed to be acquired for the Housing Board. The Sub-Registrar, therefore, made correspondence with the Land Acquisition Officer who ob-tained-legal opinion from the Govt. Pleader. The Govt. Pleader opined that since the land is not the subject matter of acquisition and the proceeding for acquisition has not been completed, the document can be admitted for registration. It is stated that the deponent accordingly sent a letter to the petitioner on 13-10-2003 calling him to appear before the sub-Registrar for registration of the document. ( 5 ) FROM the stand taken by the sub-Registrar it is clear that he had adopted a procedure unknown to law. It is well settled that even the Registrar, in exercise of power under Section 68 of the Registration Act, cannot direct the Sub-Registrar not to register a document presented to him for registration if the document complies all the statutory requirements and formalities. It is well settled that even the Registrar, in exercise of power under Section 68 of the Registration Act, cannot direct the Sub-Registrar not to register a document presented to him for registration if the document complies all the statutory requirements and formalities. It is equally well settled that the Registrar cannot refuse to register a document on the ground of under valuation nor can he inquire about the correctness of the valuation given in the instrument. He can only impound the document presented before him if it is not properly stamped. How the officers of the departments will issue an administrative instruction to the sub-Registrar to act in a particular manner which is not provided in the registration Act or the rules made thereunder. The action of the sub-Registrar, therefore, in getting clearance from the Land Acquisition officer or the Housing Board before registration of the docment, is absolutely illegal and wholly without jurisdiction. The sub Registrar is, therefore, directed to act strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Registration Act and the rules made the reunder. Needless to say that the sub-Registrar can refuse to register a document only when there is a judicial order passed by the competent Court of law or such orders which have been passed in exercise of statutory provisions of law for the time being in force. ( 6 ) FOR the aforesaid reason this writ application is allowed. The petitioner is directed to appear before the sub-Registrar on any working day, as informed by him, for the registration of the document. Application allowed. --- *** --- .