The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK (An application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950) W.P.(C) No.19795 of 2025 Urmila Samantaray …. Petitioner -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties Appeared in this case by Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode): For Petitioner -
Legal Reasoning
Mr. K.K. Mishra, Advocate. For Opposite Parties - Mr. Gyanalok Mohanty, Standing Counsel CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.C.BEHERA Date of Hearing : 14.08.2025 :: Date of Judgment :22.08.2025 A.C. Behera, J. This writ petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner praying for directing the Sub-Registrar, Jatani in the district of Khurda (O.P. No.3) through issuance of writ of mandamus to complete the process of registration of the deed for sale (copies of which are Annexure-2 Series). Because, the originals of Annexure-2 Series were presented by the petitioner on dated 10.07.2025 before the O.P. No.3 for registration, to which, the O.P. No.3 accepted, but refused to conclude the process of registration thereof informing orally to the petitioner that, she (petitioner) Page 1 of 6 does not have title over the land in question covered under the said deed for sale. 2. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State (O.P. Nos.1 to 3). 3. It is the settled propositions of law that, Sub-Registrar like O.P. No.3 cannot orally refuse to register any deed for sale presented for registration. Because, as per law, when any deed for sale is presented before the Sub-Registrar for registration, he/she (Sub-Registrar) either to register the said deed or to refuse to register the same indicating the reasons for non- registration of the same, if that document is not legally fit for registration. The Sub-Registrar has no authority or jurisdiction under law to embark into the nature of right, title and character in respect of the subject matter of the deed for sale presented for registration. If the deed in question is duly executed and sufficiently stamped and if there is no legal or formal defect therein, the Registering Authority cannot refuse to register that deed. The Registering Authority cannot delve into the roving enquiry of the nature of right, title of the vendor in respect of the subject matter of the deed for sale presented for registration. Even a person sells a property, that does not belong to him, in that situation also, there is no provision in the Registration Act to enable the Page 2 of 6 Sub-Registrar to refuse the registration of the deed, unless that deed covers the provisions enumerated in Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 for non-registration of the same. 4. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified in the ratio of the following decisions:- (i) In a case between North East Infrastructure Private Limited and Ors. Vrs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. reported in 2025 (2) Civ.C.C. 220 (Andhra Pradesh) that, the Sub-Registrar/Registrar, cannot orally refuse to receive the document and would consider the fitness of it for registration or otherwise. Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908 empowers the Registration Authorities to receive a document which is presented for registration and process the same, and thereafter, either register such sale deed or any other document or pass a refusal order. (ii) In a case between P. Pappu Vrs. Sub-Registrar, Rasipuram SRO, Rasipuram, Namakkal District reported in 2025 (2) Civil LJ 205 (Madras) that, even if a person sells a property that does not belong to him, there is no provision in the Registration Act, to enable the Registrar to refuse registration except Sections 22-A of the Registration Act. (iii) In a case between Ajay Kumar Yadav Vrs. State of Jharkhand and others reported in 2024 SCC Online Jharkhand 2127 (at para No.8) that, if the said sale deed is duly executed and sufficiently stamped and there is no legal or formal defect, the Court is of the considered view that, the Registering Authority cannot refuse to register the deed, if the same is presented for registration, as the Registering Authority is debarred from examining the nature of right, title and character in respect of the subject matter of the deed presented for registration, as the registering authority is debarred from examining the merit and consequential legal effect of the deed presented for registration. (iv) In a case between Ranjeet Singh and another Vrs Deputy Commissioner-cum-Registrar, Ambala and another reported in 2012 (3) Civil Court Cases 736 (Punjab and Haryana) that, it does not fall within the domain of the registrar or Sub Registrar to ask the executant of the deed to Page 3 of 6 establish his or her ownership in respect of the property, which is subject matter of the deed of conveyance. (v) In a case between Veerabhadrappa and Ors. Vrs. Jagadishgouda and Ors. reported in 2003 (1) Civil Court Cases 546 (Karnataka) that, Sub- Registrar has no power or authority to examine the rival claims as to whether a sale deed presented for registration is really a sale deed or not. If any person is interested in contending that the registered document is invalid or illegal for any reason, he has to question the validity before the proper forum in appropriate proceedings. (vi) In a case between Tejpal and another Vrs. State of Haryana and others reported in 2015 (Supp.) Civil Court Cases 471 (Punjab & Haryana) (at Para 1) that, Registrar cannot join issues on title for refusing to register the instrument. That shall be the exclusive domain of a civil court in a proper litigation that is brought between the parties who are at lis raising the dispute regarding title. A dispute on title can never be used before a Registrar by any party. (vii) In a case between Bilenbarric Steels Limited Vrs. Regional Development Commissioner for Iron & Steel and others reported in AIR 1991 Calcutta 62 (at Para 8) that, unless the relevant laws governing the matter provide clearly to that effect, such an authority cannot go into question of the merits of the transaction, to which, the document relate. (viii) In a case between Dinesh Singh Vrs. The State of Jharkhand and others reported in 2012 SCC Online Jharkhand 951 (at Para 13) that, if the deed is duly executed and sufficiently stamped and when there is no legal or formal defect, then the registering authority cannot refuse to register the deed, if the same is presented for registration. Because, the registering authority cannot delve into the roving enquiry of the nature of the right, title of the vendor in respect of the subject matter of the deed presented for registration. (ix) In a case between Bihar Deed Writers Association and others Vrs. State of Bihar and others reported in 1989 (2) Civil Court Cases 172 (Patna) & 1988 SCC Online Patna 142 that, if the transferor does not have any title or has an imperfect title to the property, the transferee on transfer will either get no title or he will get an imperfect title. This will be to the prejudice of the transferee and is not of any concern to the registering authority. The registering authority is bound to register it. (Para 3) Page 4 of 6 (x) In a case between Jajati Keshari Mohanty Vrs. State of Odisha and Ors. reported in 2025 (I) OLR 936 that, the Sub-Registrar has no authority or jurisdiction to refuse the registration of the sale deed questioning the title of the properties covered under the sale deed. 5. When, it is the case of the petitioner supported with an affidavit that, on dated 10.07.2025, the petitioner presented the deed for sale on payment of required stamp duties before O.P. No.3 (Sub-Registrar, Jatani) for registration, but O.P. No.3 has retained the said deed for sale presented by the petitioner on dated 10.07.2025 for registration unauthorizedly without registering it and refusing to register orally informing to the petitioner that, she (petitioner) has no title over the properties covered under the deed for sale, then at this juncture, by applying the principles of law enunciated in the ratio of the aforesaid decisions, the ends of justice shall bestly be served, if the direction will be given to the Sub-Registrar, Jatani (O.P. No.3) for registration of that deed (which was presented by the petitioner before O.P. No.3 on dated 10.07.2025 for registration, which is with the O.P. No.3 as yet) on the very same day of appearance of the petitioner and her vendee (O.P. No.4) before O.P. No.3 and produce the certified copy of this judgment. 6. In result, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed on contest. 7. The Sub-Registrar, Jatani in the district of Khurda (O.P. No.3) is directed through issuance of writ of mandamus to act upon the sale deed dated 10.07.2025 for its registration of the same on the same day Page 5 of 6 inconformity with the provisions of law envisaged in The Indian Registration Act, 1908 and Orissa Registration Rules, 1988 on production of the certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner appearing before the O.P. No.3 with the O.P. No.4. 8. As such, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of finally. Orissa High Court, Cuttack. 22.08.2025//Utkalika Nayak// Junior Stenographer (A.C. Behera), Judge. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: UTKALIKA NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 22-Aug-2025 15:26:17 Page 6 of 6