SELVI Vs. SUB REGISTRAR AND OTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The second respondent in the writ petition is the appellant herein. He is aggrieved against the order of the learned single Judge in allowing the writ petition and directing the first respondent to register the subject-matter document.

(2.) Heard both sides.

(3.) The first respondent herein, as the writ petitioner, got a sale deed executed by one Sekar and his brother on 24.05.2010 and presented the same for registration before the first respondent herein. The first respondent returned the sale deed without registering the same only on the reason that the appellant herein filed a suit for bare injunction against her co-sharers, from whom, the writ petitioner purchased the property. Challenging the said action of the registering authority, the writ petitioner filed the above writ petition. The learned single Judge, after pointing out that the suit is one for bare injunction and that there was no interim injunction granted in favour of the appellant herein in the said suit, allowed the writ petition and directed the registering authority to register the document, also by pointing out that the registering authority is entitled to return the document without registration only under the Contingency listed in Rule 22 of the Registration Rules, and filing of a case for bare injunction is not the one of such contingencies mentioned in the said Rule.