Treat validated documents at face value, Telangana HC to sub-registrars
Hyderabad: Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar of Telangana High Court on Thursday ruled that the stamps and registration department cannot refuse to register a document on the grounds that the link document referred to was a ‘validated’ document.
The judge also faulted the refusal to register such documents by relying on the endorsement, dated January 2, 2008, that was issued by the commissioner and IG of the stamps and registration department.
The court did not agree with collection of deficit stamp duty under the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, as validation. The court said that the district registrars should be cautious during validation of such documents.
As with the Registration Act, the persons who executed the documents should be verified, the court said. It directed the commissioner and IG to issue guidelines to district registrars within six weeks on the issue.
Justice Kumar was dealing with a batch of petitions challenging the refusal of registration of sale deeds by sub-registrars on the grounds that the link documents were validated documents based on the 2008 endorsement.
Ponugoti Raja Sripathi Rao, government counsel, said mere validation would not rectify the lacuna as registration of such a document was mandatory for transferring property. The government counsel said that the endorsements by the IG were in the interest of the general public and to avoid fraudulent transactions and unwanted litigation.
Justice Kumar mentioned the Yadla Ramesh case, in which the High Court had held that the power of the registering authority to refuse registration of a document was only under Sections 19, 20, 21, 22-A, 34, 35 and Rule 58 of the Telangana Rules under the Registration Act, 1908.
The court expressed concern that there was unnecessary litigation resulting from registering a document in a mechanical manner and opined that the legislature should amend the law to avoid this.
Justice Sudheer said, “This court intends to express its concern to sensitise the state about the mental agony that the citizens are undergoing for want of appropriate mechanism, checks and scrutiny while undertaking registration of a document, besides the loss of lifetime earnings of the individuals in prosecuting litigation resulting from such mechanical registrations. It is for the legislature to be concerned about such aspects and enact appropriate laws/amend the Registration Act, 1908, to avoid mental agony for citizens and to avoid unnecessary frivolous litigation, resulting from such registrations.”
