JUDGMENT 1. The Writ Petition has been filed praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing 1st Respondent to register and release the Sale Deed dated 8.1.2013 executed by the Respondents 2 & 3 in respect of the property situate in S.F. No.47/1, Kadukka Marathukkadu. Vazhappadi Village, Kalvarayanmalai, Kallakurichi. 2. The case of the Petitioner as given in the Affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition is that the Petitioner herein purchased the subject property measuring an extent of 75 cents out of 6.63 acres in Survey No.47/1, Kadukka Marathukkadu. Vazhappadi Village, Kalvarayanmalai, Kallakurichi, under registered Sale Deed on 8.1.2013. The said document was presented before the First Respondent for registration, but the First Respondent refused to register the Sale Deed and started questioning the right of his vendors. In order to satisfy the First Respondent, the Petitioner had produced the Sale Deed dated 29.7.1987 under which the vendors had purchased the property. Even then, the First Respondent was not satisfied stating that the Patta seems to have been obtained before the Respondents 2 & 3 and the same is an invalid document and not binding on the Respondents 2 & 3. Since the First Respondent has no power to raise a question regarding the title of the parties, at that time a document is presented for registration, the above Writ Petition has been filed for the aforesaid prayer. 3. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner would submit that the Act of the First Respondent in not registering the Sale Deed on the ground raised is in violation of the powers conferred under Sections 35 & 74 of the Registration Act, 1908. The Registering Authority cannot convert himself into a Civil Court and seek to decide disputed questions of title. He also referred to the recent judgment of this Court reported in Appourva J. Patel v. The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Santhome, Chennai 600 028 And Others, 2012 (4) CTC 689 , wherein this Court has clearly held that it is not the job of the registering officer under the Registration Act to find out if the title has passed on. If the Registering Authority is vested with such power a Sub-Registrar would turn himself into a Civil Court and decide disputed questions of title. If the Registering Authority is vested with such power a Sub-Registrar would turn himself into a Civil Court and decide disputed questions of title. Therefore, when that is the legal position well settled by this Court, the conduct of the Registration Authority in not registering is totally illegal and Arbitrary and therefore prays for appropriate direction to be given to the Registrar, the First Respondent herein. He also adds that the Respondent 2 & 3 are only the vendors of the Petitioner who had executed a Sale Deed in favour of the Petitioner which was presented for registration. 4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the First Respondent would admit this position. Therefore, I am inclined to direct the First Respondent herein to register and release the Sale Deed dated 8.1.2013 executed by the Second and Third Respondents in respect of the subject property, viz., S.F. No.47/1, Kadukka Marathukkadu. Vazhappadi Village, Kalvarayanmalari, Kallakurichi immediately if it is otherwise in order. The Respondents 2 & 3, being formal parties, no notice was directed to be issued to them. 5. The Writ Petition allowed in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.