LAWS(KER)-2019-2-207

ROMIN Vs. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR

Decided On February 01, 2019
Romin Appellant
V/S
THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayers in the above writ petition (Civil) are as follows:

(2.) Heard Sri.C.S.Manu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Sr.Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

(3.) The core of minimal factual elements required and necessary for the disposal of this case, in the manner proposed to be ordered by this Court are as follows: Petitioners 2 & 3 have executed Ext.P-6 rectification deed dated 09.07.2018 in favour of the 1st petitioner, wherein rectification is sought for, in respect of Ext.P-1 sale deed and has presented the same before the 2nd respondent-Sub Registrar for registration. The complaint of the petitioners is that the 2 nd respondent-Sub Registrar has refused even to receive the same and for consideration as to whether it is to be registered or not. The main contention raised by Sri.C.S.Manu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is that the said action of the 2 nd respondent-Sub Registrar is illegal and ultra vires and that he is certainly obliged to permit the executants like the petitioners to present the same for registration before him and thereafter, he will have two courses of action in exercise of discretion, firstly either to register the same, if it is found by him to be in order and on the other hand, if he finds that there are valid and weighty reasons not to register it, then he will have the discretion to refuse the registration of the deed, but only after showing cogent, valid and relevant grounds for refusing such registration. That if the former course is opted to by the 2nd respondent in exercise of his discretion, then the grievance of the petitioner will be completely alleviated. If on the other hand, the 2nd respondent goes for the second option in exercise of his discretion, then certainly parties like the petitioners have the right to challenge the said decision of the 2nd respondent in refusing to register the said document, in the manner known to law, in appropriate proceedings.