Registrar's Circular Annulling Registrations Ruled Ultra Vires Registration Act

The court held that the Circular dated July 13, 2016, empowering the Registrar to annul registered documents was ultra vires the Registration Act, 1908. The court set aside the Circular, emphasizing that the Registrar lacks authority to annul registrations post-registration. The writ petition was allowed, affirming that any disputes regarding fraudulent registrations must be resolved through civil court proceedings. The court dismissed the accompanying CM. No. 35206/2018 as infructuous.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the Circular dated July 13, 2016, issued by the Inspector General of Registration.
2. Authority of the Registrar to annul registered documents.
3. Applicability of the Supreme Court judgment in Satya Pal Anand v. State of Madhya Pradesh.
4. Interpretation of Section 82 of the Registration Act and Section 21 of the General Clauses Act.
5. Role and powers of the Registrar post-registration of documents.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of the Circular dated July 13, 2016:
The petitioner challenged the Circular dated July 13, 2016, which prescribed a procedure for handling complaints of fraudulent registration through impersonation or false documents. The petitioner argued that this circular, based on the Andhra Pradesh High Court's judgment in Yanala Malleshwari v. Ananthalu Sayamma, was a misinterpretation and contradicted the Supreme Court's ruling in Satya Pal Anand v. State of Madhya Pradesh. The court noted that the circular aimed to address fraudulent registrations by allowing the Registrar to annul such registrations, which the petitioner contended was beyond the Registrar's authority.

2. Authority of the Registrar to Annul Registered Documents:
The petitioner argued that once a document is registered, the Registrar becomes functus officio, meaning the Registrar's authority ends, and only a civil court can annul the registration. The court examined the Supreme Court's judgment in Satya Pal Anand, which stated that there is no express provision in the Registration Act empowering the Registrar to recall or annul a registration. The court emphasized that the power to cancel the registration is a substantive matter and cannot be assumed in the absence of express legislative provision.

3. Applicability of the Supreme Court Judgment in Satya Pal Anand v. State of Madhya Pradesh:
The court relied heavily on the Supreme Court's judgment in Satya Pal Anand, which clarified that the Registrar has no authority to cancel the registration of any document once it is registered. The judgment stated that the role of the Sub-Registrar ends post-registration, and any irregularities or fraudulent actions must be addressed through civil court proceedings. The court found this judgment directly applicable, reinforcing that the Registrar cannot annul registrations.

4. Interpretation of Section 82 of the Registration Act and Section 21 of the General Clauses Act:
The respondents argued that even without express provisions, the Registrar could annul registrations obtained through fraud by exercising inherent powers, citing Section 82 of the Registration Act and Section 21 of the General Clauses Act. However, the court rejected this argument, stating that the Supreme Court in Satya Pal Anand had already determined that the Registrar lacks such powers. The court held that neither Section 82 of the Registration Act nor Section 21 of the General Clauses Act could be invoked to annul a registration.

5. Role and Powers of the Registrar Post-Registration of Documents:
The court reiterated that the Registrar's role concludes once a document is registered, as per the Supreme Court's ruling. The court noted that the impugned circular's provision allowing the Registrar to annul registrations was ultra vires the Registration Act, 1908. The court emphasized that any disputes or claims of fraud related to registered documents must be resolved through civil court proceedings, not by the Registrar.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that the Circular dated July 13, 2016, to the extent it empowered the Registrar to annul registered documents, was ultra vires the Registration Act, 1908, and set it aside. The writ petition was allowed, reinforcing that the Registrar has no authority to annul registrations, and such matters must be addressed by civil courts. The court dismissed the accompanying CM. No. 35206/2018 as infructuous.

---