Orissa High Court Mandates Written Refusal for Document Registration
Sub-Registrar's Oral Refusal Declared Non-compliant with Registration Laws
In a significant ruling, the Orissa High Court, presided over by Justice Ananda Chandra Behera, has directed the Sub-Registrar of Titilagarh in Bolangir district to accept and register a sale deed presented by petitioners Harishankar Deep and another, who faced oral refusal for registration due to a lack of consent from their co-sharers. The court emphasized that oral refusals violate the statutory requirements under the Registration Act, 1908, and the Orissa Registration Rules, 1988, which mandate written reasons for non-registration of documents.
The case, WP(C) No.24700 of 2025, saw the petitioners challenge the Sub-Registrar's refusal to accept their deed for sale, which they attempted to register without the signatures of their co-sharers. Represented by Advocate Mr. Ghanashyam Das, the petitioners argued that such refusal was against their rights as co-sharers under Section 44 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, which permits the transfer of undivided shares in joint property without needing consent from other co-sharers.
Justice Behera, in his judgment dated September 16, 2025, reiterated that the Sub-Registrar must process all documents presented for registration. If a document is not legally fit for registration, the refusal must be in writing, detailing the reasons as stipulated by Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908. The court declared that any executive instructions or circulars contradicting these statutory provisions are deemed non-est and inapplicable.
The judgment also referenced prior decisions, including North East Infrastructure Private Limited v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Antaryami Nayak v. State of Odisha, affirming the Sub-Registrar's duty to follow statutory law over any conflicting executive directives. The court highlighted that co-sharers possess an inherent right to alienate their shares, and the refusal to register based on the absence of consent from other co-sharers is unwarranted.
Consequently, Justice Behera directed the Sub-Registrar, Titilagarh, to process the petitioners' deed for sale as per legal requirements. Upon registration, the deed must be returned to the petitioners within three days, complying with Rule 100 of the Orissa Registration Rules, 1988, and relevant notifications.
This ruling underscores the importance of adhering to statutory provisions in document registration processes and protects the rights of co-sharers in property transactions. The court's decision is expected to influence registration practices across Odisha, ensuring compliance with established legal standards and safeguarding property rights.
Harishankar Deep v. State of Odisha, (Orissa) : Law Finder Doc id # 2780001
