K S VIJAYENDRAN Vs. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner has executed a settlement deed in favour of his wife, D. Muthulakshmi, under a settlement deed dated 23.8.2010 and presented it for registration in the office of the second Respondent. The second Respondent, without registering the deed and without assigning any reason, is keeping it as pending Document No. P1243 of 2010. The Petitioner has also paid the entire stamp duty and registration charges in respect of the settlement deed. On enquiry, the second Respondent has directed the Petitioner to produce the title deeds relating to the property sought to be settled by him in favour of his wife, failing which the registration will be refused. The operative portion of the communication of the second Respondent dated 15.11.2010 is as follows:

(2.) It is now brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Special Government Pleader that subsequent to the filing of the writ petition, the second Respondent has passed an order on 28.1.2011 refusing registration by placing reliance on the circular issued by the first Respondent dated 15.9.2010.

(3.) A reference to the circular dated 15.9.2010, which has been referred to by the second Respondent for passing order refusing to register the settlement deed, is only in the form of a guideline explaining about Rule 55 of the Registration Rules in order to avoid registration of bogus documents, which are either prohibited as per law or issued by way of restraint order by the Court.