The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court has issued an Order on 03 June 2019,
on a Writ praying to direct a Sub-Registrar, in Ariyalur District.to return the original sale deeds dated owned by the petitioner within a reasonable time. However, in course, the case has taken a few turns with the joining of the third Respondent, M/s.Kalaimaghal Sabha.
"It was submitted that since the properties were not registered in the name of M/s. Kalaimaghal Sabha, the refusal and failure to return the documents after registration to her were not proper." the petitioner held.
According to M/s.Kalimaghal Sabha, the transaction is vitiated by fraud and therefore the document cannot be returned.
The order recollects another order of the Principal Bench of the same High Court, by which the government appointed officers to act as the Joint Receivers of Kalaimaghal Sabha.
The court has ordered that "the Joint Receivers shall file a detailed report as is contemplated in Section 43 of the Act and call for a general meeting of the members as per the procedure prescribed under the Act within a period of six months of this order to bring a closure to the case."
The court in it's Order has dismissed the writ petition with drections to The Superintendent of Police, The Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department, The Sub Registrar, Lalgudi and his counter parts in the State to register all the sale deeds presented for registration of land by the Kalaimagal Sabha in its favour and complete the process within a period of two months forthwith.
The order further adds that, "The Registrar acting under the T.N. Societies Registration Act, 1975 shall deal with the surplus assets of the 3rd respondent as is contemplated
under the Act.
Drawing attention to Section 52 of the Registration Act, 1908, Chapter 2 of the Registration Rules and Rule 55 of Chapter
11 Registration Rules, the order adds that, "Though, it forms no part of the duty of the registering officer to enquire into the validity of the document presented for registration or to attend to any written or oral/verbal request against the registration of a document based on the ground that the executing party has no right to execute the document, yet the registration could not have been completed in favour of the vendors of the petitioner contrary to the order of the Court inW.P.No.514 of 1999" the court held.
Download Order
on a Writ praying to direct a Sub-Registrar, in Ariyalur District.to return the original sale deeds dated owned by the petitioner within a reasonable time. However, in course, the case has taken a few turns with the joining of the third Respondent, M/s.Kalaimaghal Sabha.
"It was submitted that since the properties were not registered in the name of M/s. Kalaimaghal Sabha, the refusal and failure to return the documents after registration to her were not proper." the petitioner held.
According to M/s.Kalimaghal Sabha, the transaction is vitiated by fraud and therefore the document cannot be returned.
The order recollects another order of the Principal Bench of the same High Court, by which the government appointed officers to act as the Joint Receivers of Kalaimaghal Sabha.
The court has ordered that "the Joint Receivers shall file a detailed report as is contemplated in Section 43 of the Act and call for a general meeting of the members as per the procedure prescribed under the Act within a period of six months of this order to bring a closure to the case."
The court in it's Order has dismissed the writ petition with drections to The Superintendent of Police, The Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department, The Sub Registrar, Lalgudi and his counter parts in the State to register all the sale deeds presented for registration of land by the Kalaimagal Sabha in its favour and complete the process within a period of two months forthwith.
The order further adds that, "The Registrar acting under the T.N. Societies Registration Act, 1975 shall deal with the surplus assets of the 3rd respondent as is contemplated
under the Act.
Drawing attention to Section 52 of the Registration Act, 1908, Chapter 2 of the Registration Rules and Rule 55 of Chapter
11 Registration Rules, the order adds that, "Though, it forms no part of the duty of the registering officer to enquire into the validity of the document presented for registration or to attend to any written or oral/verbal request against the registration of a document based on the ground that the executing party has no right to execute the document, yet the registration could not have been completed in favour of the vendors of the petitioner contrary to the order of the Court inW.P.No.514 of 1999" the court held.
Download Order
What is the position of this case now?
ReplyDelete