A group of fraudulent persons attempted to grab our ancestral house in which we are living till date. The fraudulent persons made several encumbrances on our property within a period of 1 year by creating bogus Gift Deed, Sale Agreement and Sale Deed etc. When we came to know about the fraudulent encumbrances made on our property, we brought it to the notice of the concerned sub-registrar who entertained all such fraudulent entries on our property and the sub-registrar was notified through verbally, through written letters/complaints and through court notices. The sub-registrar and the district registrar simply replied that they are acting upon as per the provisions contained in the sections 34 & 35 and Rule 55 of the Registration Act 1908 and they have not violated an iota of the said Act. The sub-registrar and the district registrar were told to consider the sections of the same registration act wherein it is stated that
- The registering officials should act like a civil court
- The registering official can decline registration if he smelt fraud or forgery
- Should consider the complaint when it is brought to his notice
Since all our requests/complaints did not yield any fruitful action by the registering officials, and the police too failed to take the complaint stating that it is a matter of civil dispute, I was forced to file a writ petition in the High Court of Madras, challenging the fraudulent registrations made on our property and requested the Honourable High Court to annul all the encumbrances.
The Government Advocate who appeared on behalf of the Registration department, argued that the sub-registrar acted as per the sections 34 & 35 and Rule 55 of the Registration Act 1908 and the Honourable Judge accepting the argument dismissed the Writ petition saying that sub-registrar as per the role defined in the Registration Act and I was directed to file a civil suit in the lower court if I am the genuine owner.
Though I wanted to appeal against the judgment, I was misguided by my lawyer and even one of the lawyer from the LCI replied to my query that the act of the registrar is correct as per the registration act.
Now, the Inspector General of Registration, Chennai has issued a circular under the No. 67 dated 3rd November 2011 in which he has clearly stated that Section 82 and Section 83, the sub-registrar/registrar can initiate action against the fraudulent persons when a complaint is brought to the notice of the registering officials by the aggrieved party.
As a layman, I simply raise the question to the members of the learned lawyers forum to give their views:
1) Any document registered with the registration department becomes a legal document which means that it has got a legal hold. Right ? When it is so, before giving the legal validity, is it not the responsibility of the registering officials to consider and verify the legality of the transaction before authenticating it ?
2) As a layman, in my writ petition, I stated that the registration done by the registrar on our property by a third and unknown person is wrong while the property s registered in my father’s name and the person who made the current registration is no way connected or related and done the registration without establishing any relationship or ownership. The registrar says that I am no way concerned to check the validity of the ownership. When a document is presented before me for registration, it is my duty to check whether the concerned parties are present, their identity established and they are in sound mental condition. And he says that even he does not have the power to recall or revoke the action done by him. When the registering officials said so, I approached the Police to make a complaint on the fraudulent persons but the police too refused to accept the complaint saying that it is civil dispute and police cannot interfere. As a last course, I approached the High Court bringing forth all the facts and sought for the cancellation of encumbrances. And the court too says that registrar is right and you file a civil suit if you are the genuine owner and see if you are lucky enough to survive when the final judgment is delivered on your property. What a ----------- system we have got ? I leave it to the choice of honourable member of LCI to fill up blank portion as I have no word to comment on it.
3) Now, the Inspector General of Registration, Chennai having said in his circular that Registrar cannot deny accepting the complaints from the aggrieved parties and should act upon as per the provisions contained in Section 82 and 83 of the Registration Act, it clearly revelas that i) the lawyer who pleaded for me in the writ petition is not fully aware of the Registration Act and argued my case ii) The lawyer who represented the Registering officials too not aware of the provisions contained in Section 82 and 83 of the Registration Act defended the Registering officials. And iii) the most intolerable incident is the judgment made by the honourable judge who without going through the Registration Act or consulting the head of the Registration department delivering such a biased judgment.
4) The worst part is in the judgment delivered at Madurai by the Madras High Court Bench in Writ Petition (MD)No.10543 of 2009 where the judge has given his verdict saying that The rule clearly states “it forms no part of a registering officer's duty to enquire into the validity of a document brought to him for registration or to attend to any written or verbal protest against the registration of a document based on the ground that the executing party had no right to execute the document.” I understand that I cannot comment upon the judgment or the judge who delivered his judgment. Then to whom else we can complain about these sort of errand judges ?
5) My writ petition was dismissed about a year back or so. Can I reopen the case bringing forth the IG Registration’s circular and seek fresh verdict ?
I would be very grateful if the learned lawyers give their opinion on this issue.
Thanks & Regards