Questions Of Title Of Ownership Of Property Should Be Determined By Civil Court & Not Registering Authority: Madras HC Reiterates
The Madras High Court, Madurai Bench has reiterated that the questions of the title of the ownership of property should be determined by a civil court and not by a registering authority.
The Court said that, however, the registering authority is empowered to conduct an enquiry in relation to the matters specified under Section 82 of the Registration Act, 1908.
A Single Bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy held, “The settled legal position is that questions of title should be determined by a civil court and not by a registering authority. The registering authority is, however, empowered to conduct an enquiry in relation to the matters specified in Section 82 of the Registration Act. The matters specified in Section 82 include the making of a false statement before the registering authority, the production of a false document before the registering authority, impersonation and the like. Section 83 empowers the registering authority to initiate prosecution for any offence under the Registration Act.”
The Bench noted that the power of the registering authority to cancel a registered document is exercisable if such registered document falls within the scope of Section 77A of the Registration Act.
Advocate V.R. Shanmuganathan appeared for the petitioner while Additional Government Pleader M. Prakash and Advocate A.L. Vijay Devaraj appeared for the respondents.
In this case, the petitioner assailed an order of the District Registrar by which it rejected her request to cancel the registration of the sale deed dated July 5, 2012. The petitioner had approached the Sub Judge seeking partition of a property and the suit was directed against her brothers and sisters by which her 6/20th share in the property was recognized.
The High Court after hearing contentions of the counsel observed, “… the impugned order is liable to be interfered with to the extent that the second respondent has failed to examine and determine whether any false statements were made before him.”
The Court remitted the matter for reconsideration after setting aside the order and directed the District Registrar to reconsider whether a false statement was made and whether power can be exercised in terms of Sections 77A, 82, and 83 of the Act.
“Before taking any decision, all interested parties, including the petitioner and respondents herein, should be put on notice and provided reasonable opportunity”, also directed the Court.
Accordingly, the Court disposed of the plea.
Cause Title- V. Selvi v. The Inspector General of Registration & Ors.
