TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (10) TMI 1682
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... case and in the interest of justice." 2. In substance, the challenge in the writ petition is to the Circular dated July 13, 2016, whereby procedure has been evolved to be followed on complaints relating to fraudulent registration through impersonation or production of false documents and evidences, and the same is in the following manner: - "In the light of the above discussion, following mandatory procedure is prescribed to deal with the complaints relating to fraudulent registrations through impersonation or production of false documents and evidences. a) All such complaints of fraudulent registration received by the department have to be forwarded to the respective District Registrar who shall register the same in the register of complaints relating to fraudulent registration in the following format: Sl. No. Date Name and address of applicant Documents no. and SR Office name Name and address of the executants claimants and witness b) After entering the complaints, he shall issue notices to the executants of the documents and witness to appear for enquiry along with the complainants and he shall also take witness of the registering of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ore res integra in view of Para 40 of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Satya Pal Anand v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2016) 10 SCC 767. She stated, Rule 53 of the Delhi Administration Registration Authority Manual Vol-II 1976 already provided for cancellation of a registered deed by Court under Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act, hence, the respondents accept the sole legal remedy for cancellation of a deed and still by the impugned circular, the respondents intend to take away the right of the parties to approach the Civil Court. Moreover, in its earlier circular dated November 12, 2014, vide para 8(ii), the Sub Registrars were directed not to refrain from registering a deed unless there is a Court order. However, in the present circular, the Registrars are even given powers to cancel a registered deed. According to her, Registrar becomes functus officio on the registration of a Deed. She stated that the Apex Court in Satyapal Anand (supra) has held that Registrar becomes functus officio the moment a deed has been registered by a Registrar, i.e. his authority comes to an end. She stated, the impugned circular is ultra vires the Registration Act, 1908 ('Registration....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t with the Section 69 of the Registration Act. Even the Apex Court in Satyapal Anand (supra) clearly held "that even the Inspector General has no power to cancel the registration of any document which has been already been registered". 7. It is the case of the respondents and contended by its counsel Mr. Ramesh Singh that the present challenge by the petitioner coupled with the reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Satyapal Anand (supra) is misconceived. He stated, even though there is no express power under the Registration Act to cancel / recall the registration of an instrument, it can still be cancelled / recalled by the registering authority exercising its inherent powers, if the said registration has been obtained by playing fraud on the registering authority. This exception of "fraud", being the ground for exercising inherent power, even in the absence of express provision, has been recognized by the Supreme Court in the case of Indian National Congress (I) v. Institute of Social Welfare (2002) 5 SCC 685. And under the present impugned circular, the power to recall and thereby annul the original registration by the registering authority, is also based u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vil proceedings can go on parallelly, but also findings of one is not binding on the other. 8. Mr. Singh would submit, the power to recall a registration by the registering authority on account of fraud as contemplated in the impugned circular, can also be independently traced to Section 21 of the General Clauses Act by relying on the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Yanala Malleshwari (supra). According to Mr. Singh, even though there is no express provision under the Act, to recall and accordingly cancel a registration of an instrument, the impugned circular intending to do so can still derive its said source of power from Section 69 of the Act, particularly Clause (j) of Sub-section (1) thereof. The said provision clearly empowers an Inspector-General to make rules consistent with the Act. He stated by virtue of Article 162 of the Constitution of India, an executive order to supplement a statute or cover areas to which a statute does not extend or in respect of matters required to be prescribed by rules can always be issued. In this regard, he would rely upon the judgment in the case of Jantia Hill Truck Owners Association v. Shailang Area Coal Dealer and Truck Ow....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eproduced in Para 2 above. 11. A reading of the aforesaid procedure makes it apparent that when complaints are filed, and on an enquiry by following a summary procedure, it is proved that the registration has taken place through false documents and evidences, impersonation etc., order shall be passed recording the findings, with a direction to register an FIR and annulment of the registration. The plea of the learned counsel for the petitioner primarily has been that document registered by the Sub-Registrar cannot be annulled by him as there is no stipulation empowering the Registrar to carry out the said act. The same can be done only through the process of a Civil Court. The issue is no more res-integra in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Satya Pal Anand (supra) wherein one of the issues which fell for consideration of the Supreme Court was whether the Sub-Registrar (Registration) has authority to cancel the registration of any document. The Supreme Court in paras 34 and 36 held as under: "34. The role of the Sub-Registrar (Registration) stands discharged, once the document is registered (see Raja Mohammad Amir Ahmad Khan (supra). Section 17 of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing Officer to register the documents presented for registration by one party and execution thereof to be admitted or denied by the other party thereafter, it is unfathomable as to how the registration of the document by following procedure specified in the Act of 1908 can be said to be fraudulent. As aforementioned, some irregularity in the procedure committed during the registration process would not lead to a fraudulent execution and registration of the document, but a case of mere irregularity. In either case, the party aggrieved by such registration of document is free to challenge its validity before the Civil Court. (emphasis supplied)" 12. From the reading of the above paras of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Satya Pal Anand (supra), the following emerges: - (i) The role of Sub Registrar (Registration) stands discharged, once the document is registered. (ii) There is no express provision in the Registration Act which impowers Registrar to recall registration. (iii) The fact whether the document was properly presented for registration cannot be reopened by the Registrar after its registration. (iv) The power of the I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se where reference is made to an express provision contained in the Andhra Pradesh Rules, being Rule 26(k)(i). The rules were framed by the State of Andhra Pradesh after the decision of the Full Bench in Yanala Malleshwari (supra). The Supreme Court in the said judgment in paras 4 and 5 has held as under: "4. In our opinion, there was no need for the Appellants to approach the civil Court as the said cancellation deed dated 4.8.2005 as well as registration of the same was wholly void and non est and can be ignored altogether. For illustration, if 'A' transfers a piece of land to 'B' by a registered sale deed, then, if it is not disputed that 'A' had -the title to the land, that title passes to 'B' on the registration of the sale deed (retrospectively from the date of the execution of the same) and 'B' then becomes the owner of the land. If 'A' wants to subsequently get the sale deed cancelled, he has to file a civil suit for cancellation or else he can request 'B' to sell the land back to 'A' but by no stretch of imagination, can a cancellation deed be executed or registered. This is unheard of in law. ....