Kerala High Court
The Inspector General Of Registration vs Ashamol K P on 21 July, 2025
Author: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
2025:KER:53343
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2025/30TH ASHADHA, 1947
W.A.NO.2008 OF 2024
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 15.01.2024 IN W.P(C).NO.15095 OF 2015
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENTS IN WPC:
1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
ADOOR, PIN - 689645
2 THE SUB REGISTRAR
KONNI, PIN - 689691
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER
(TAXES)
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER IN WPC:
THOMAS DANIEL
S/O.E S DANIEL, ILLIRIKKAL HOUSE, KONNI,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689691
BY ADV.SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE
BY ADV.SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE
BY ADV.SMT.ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM
BY ADV.SMT.V.T.LITHA
BY ADV.SMT.K.R.MONISHA
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.07.2025 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.1481 OF 2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 2 ::
2025:KER:53343
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2025/30TH ASHADHA, 1947
W.A.NO.1481 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.05.2025 IN W.P(C).NO.1930 OF 2023
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENTS IN WP(C):
1 THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION,
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION,
EX-MAJOR R BALAKRISHNAN NAIR ROAD, NEAR DISTRICT
COURT, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA,
PIN - 695035
2 THE SUB REGISTRAR,
OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI,
PIN - 682011
3 THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR,
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI,
PIN - 682011
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
VILLAGE OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI,
PIN - 682011
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER
(TAXES)
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONERS IN WP(C):
1 REJEESH G,
AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, ATHAM HOUSE,
PERUVARAM KARA, KOTTUVALLY VILLAGE, NORTH PARAVUR TALUK,
NORTH PARAVUR PO, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683513
2 M/S.HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED,
DOOR NO.39/6457 OF COCHIN CORPORATION, RAVIPURAM
JUNCTION, M.G.ROAD, THRIKKANARVATTOM DESOM, PERUMANOOR
P.O., ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 3 ::
2025:KER:53343
DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER
SRI.SACHIN A.S, S/O. T K SHANAVAS, PIN - 682015
BY ADV.SRI.SHIJU VARGHESE
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.07.2025 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.2008 OF 2024 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 4 ::
2025:KER:53343
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2025/30TH ASHADHA, 1947
W.A.NO.1482 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.05.2025 IN W.P(C).NO.17193 OF 2023
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 IN WP(C):
1 THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION,
EX-MAJOR R BALAKRISHNAN NAIR ROAD, NEAR DISTRICT
COURT, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695035
2 THE SUB REGISTRAR
SUB REGISTRY OFFICE, ALUVA, PIN - 683101
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER
(TAXES)
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER & 3RD RESPONDENT IN WP(C):
1 SEENA KANNAN
AGED 47 YEARS
W/O. AJITHKUMAR, EDAKKATTIL HOUSE, AMITY ASTER DALE
VILLA, ALUVA P.O, PIN - 683101
2 AUTHORIZED OFFICER
BAJAJ HOUSING FINANCE LTD, COCHIN, PIN - 682017
BY ADV.SRI.JAISON JOSEPH
BY ADV.SRI.JIMMY JOSEPH
BY ADV.SMT.ARCHANA RAMANAN
BY ADV.SMT.VEENA VALLIKANTHAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.07.2025 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.2008 OF 2024 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 5 ::
2025:KER:53343
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2025/30TH ASHADHA, 1947
W.A.NO.1490 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.05.2025 IN W.P(C).NO.11527 OF 2023
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENS 1 & 2 IN WP(C):
1 SUB REGISTRAR
OFFICE OF THE MEENACHIL SUB-REGISTRAR, MEENACHIL,
PALA, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686575
2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
BHARANANGANAM VILLAGE OFFICE, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686578
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER
(TAXES)
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER & 3RD RESPONDENT:
1 MANOJ JOHN KAPPEN
AGED 50 YEARS
VALIYAKAPPIL HOUSE, ANTHINADU.P.O., PALA, KOTTAYAM,
PIN - 686651
2 SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.
REGIONAL OFFICE, 1ST FLOOR , REGENCY SQUARE, K.K.ROAD,
KOTTAYAM. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER.,
PIN - 686002
BY ADV.SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE
BY ADV.SRI.ZAKEER HUSSAIN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.07.2025 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.2008 OF 2024 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 6 ::
2025:KER:53343
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2025/30TH ASHADHA, 1947
W.A.NO.1491 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.05.2025 IN W.P(C).NO.25722 OF 2023
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENTS IN WP(C):
1 THE PRINCIPAL SUB REGISTRAR
PRINCIPAL SUB REGISTRAR'S OFFICE, KOTTARAKKARA,
KOLLAM, PIN - 691506
2 THE RECOVERY OFFICER
DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682036
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER
(TAXES)
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER IN WP(C):
NOWFAL SALAM @ MOHAMMED NOWFAL
AGED 45 YEARS
S/O.ABDUL SALAM, MANAGING PARTNER,
TASTY NUT INDUSTRIES, KILIKOLLOOR RESIDING
AT PATTATHIL HOUSE, AYATHIL P O , KOLLAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 691017
BY ADV.SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.07.2025 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.2008 OF 2024 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 7 ::
2025:KER:53343
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2025/30TH ASHADHA, 1947
W.A.NO.1494 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.05.2025 IN W.P(C).NO.25608 OF 2023
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 IN WPC:
1 SUB REGISTRAR
OFFICE OF THE MEENACHIL SUB- REGISTRAR, MEENACHIL,
PALA, KOTTAYAM., PIN - 686575
2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
LALAM VILLAGE OFFICE, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686574
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER
(TAXES)
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER AND 3RD RESPONENT IN WPC:
1 DALY BIJI
MYLADOOR HOUSE, ANTHINADU.P.O., PALA, KOTTAYAM,
PIN - 686651
2 SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.
REGIONAL OFFICE, 1ST FLOOR, REGENCY SQUARE, K.K.ROAD,
COLLECTORATE.P.O., KOTTAYAM. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF
MANAGER, PIN - 686002
BY ADV.SRI.ZAKEER HUSSAIN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.07.2025 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.2008 OF 2024 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 8 ::
2025:KER:53343
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2025/30TH ASHADHA, 1947
W.A.NO.1504 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.05.2025 IN W.P(C).NO.6290 OF 2023
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/1ST RESPONDENT IN WPC:
SUB REGISTRAR
OFFICE OF THE THRIKKAKKARA SUB REGISTRAR,
THRIKKAKKARA KAKKANAD, PIN - 682030
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER
(TAXES)
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER & 2ND RESPONDENT IN WPC:
1 JITHIN JAMEEL
AGED 42 YEARS
RESIDING AT KUMBALATH HOUSE, PALLIPATTUMURI,
THRIKKUNNAPPUZHA P.O. ALAPPUZHA - 690 515.
REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
MUHAMMED RAFI.T, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.THAMEEM,
RESIDING AT MADATHINKAL HOUSE, PANOOR,
THRIKKUNNAPPUZHA.P.O, KARTHIKAPPALLY TALUK,
ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690515
2 FEDERAL BANK LTD
LCRD/ERNAKULAM DIVISION, GROUND FLOOR, FEDERAL TOWERS,
MARINE DRIVE, KOCHI. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED
OFFICER., PIN - 682031
BY ADV.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE
BY ADV.SRI.ZAKEER HUSSAIN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.07.2025 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.2008 OF 2024 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 9 ::
2025:KER:53343
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2025/30TH ASHADHA, 1947
W.A.NO.1507 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.05.2025 IN W.P(C).NO.14650 OF 2024
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENT IN WPC:
THE SUB REGISTRAR, OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR,
MAVELIKKARA SRO, MAVELIKKARA P.O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,
PIN - 690101
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER
(TAXES)
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONERS IN WPC:
1 B. VIJAYAKUMAR,
AGED 55 YEARS
S/O. BALAN PILLAI, KALLELATHUTHARAYIL SIVADEVAM,
PALLARIMANGALAM P.O, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,
PIN - 690107
2 THE FEDERAL BANK LIMITED, LCRD/MAVELIKKARA (SATELLITE)
DIVISION, 1ST FLOOR, PADINJARETHALACKAL CHERIAN
CHAMBERS, PUTHIYAKAVU, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY ASSITANT VICE PRESIDENT AND AUTHORIZED
OFFICER, PIN - 690101
BY ADV.SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.07.2025 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.2008 OF 2024 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 10 ::
2025:KER:53343
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2025/30TH ASHADHA, 1947
W.A.NO.1539 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.05.2025 IN W.P(C).NO.5246 OF 2023
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 IN WP(C):
1 SUB REGISTRAR
OFFICE OF THE KADATHURUTHY SUB REGISTRY, MARKET JUNCTIN,
KADATHURUTHY, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686604
2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
KOTHANALLOOR VILLAGE OFFICE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM,
PIN - 686141
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER
(TAXES)
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER & THIRD RESPONDENT IN WP(C):
1 SATHEESH BABU
AGED 67 YEARS
NEDIYATHU VILLA, CHIRAKKULAM ROAD, ETTUMANOOR,
KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686631
2 SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.
REGIONAL OFFICE, 1ST FLOOR, REGENCY SQUARE, K.K.ROAD,
KOTTAYAM. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER,
PIN - 686002
BY ADV.SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE
BY ADV.ZAKEER HUSSAIN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.07.2025 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.2008 OF 2024 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 11 ::
2025:KER:53343
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2025/30TH ASHADHA, 1947
W.A.NO.1540 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.05.2025 IN W.P(C).NO.8079 OF 2023
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/1,2 & 5TH RESPONENT IN WP(C):
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695035
2 THE SUB REGISTRAR
OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR, KAPPALANDIMUKKU,
MATTANCHERRY, KOCHI, KERALA, PIN - 682002
3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
RAMESWARAM VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK, PULLARDESHAM ROAD,
PALLURUTHY, KOCHI, KERALA, PIN - 682006
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER
(TAXES)
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER AND 3, 4 AND 6TH RESPONDENTS IN WP(C):
1 M/S.VTJ FISHERIES PVT. LTD.
HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT CC XVIII/54, THOPPUMPADY,
KOCHI- 682 005, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
SRI.JOSEPH J.VAYALAT, AGED 49, S/O.V.T.JOSEPH,
VAYALATT HOUSE, MARY MAGDALENE CHURCH, MOOTHEDAM,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682304
2 THE AUTHORISED OFFICER
FEDERAL BANK LTD, LCRD/ERNAKULAM DIVISION,
GROUND FLOOR, FEDERAL TOWERS, MARIN DRIVE,
ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682031
3 FEDERAL BANK LTD.
M G ROAD, NORTH END, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI,
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 12 ::
2025:KER:53343
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF MANAGER,
PIN - 682031
4 DEPUTY SECRETARY
KOCHI CORPORATION, ZONAL OFFICE, SDPY ROAD,
PALLURUTHY, KOCHI, KERALA, PIN - 682006
BY ADV.SRI.PEEYUS A. KOTTAM
BY ADV.SRI.LEO GEORGE
BY ADV.SRI.P.PAULOCHAN ANTONY
BY SRI.K.JANARDHANA SHENOY, STANDING COUNSEL, KOCHI
CORPORATION
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.07.2025 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.2008 OF 2024 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 13 ::
2025:KER:53343
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2025/30TH ASHADHA, 1947
W.A.NO.1585 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.05.2025 IN W.P(C).NO.22150 OF 2023
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/FIRST RESPONDENT IN WP(C):
THE SUB REGISTRAR
SUB-REGISTRAR OFFICE, PUTHENCRUZ, PUTHENCRUZ,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682308
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER
(TAXES)
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER AND SECOND RESPONDENT IN WP(C):
1 ANIL KUMAR PALATHINKAL
AGED 62 YEARS
S/O GEORGE P.U., PALATHINKAL HOUSE, N.F.GATE, OPPOSITE
PETTAH BRIDGE, NADAMA VILLAGE, TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 682301
2 UNION BANK OF INDIA
ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH, 2ND FLOOR, UNION BANK BHAVAN,
M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM 682 035. REPRESENTED BY ITS
AUTHORIZED OFFICER
BY ADV.SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.)
BY ADV.SMT.NISHA GEORGE
BY ADV.SRI.ASP.KURUP
BY ADV.SRI.SADCHITH.P.KURUP
BY ADV.SRI.C.P.ANIL RAJ
BY ADV.SRI.SIVA SURESH
BY ADV.SMT.B.SREEDEVI
BY ADV.SMT.ATHIRA VIJAYAN
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 14 ::
2025:KER:53343
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.07.2025 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.2008 OF 2024 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 15 ::
2025:KER:53343
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2025/30TH ASHADHA, 1947
W.A.NO.1672 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.05.2025 IN W.P(C).NO.2891 OF 2024
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENTS 2 & 3 IN WP(C):
1 SUB REGISTRAR
2ND FLOOR, PERUMPILLY BUILDING MAHATHMAGANDI ROAD,
ABOVE KEERTHILAL JEWELLERY, KPCC JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682011
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY REVENUE
THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
3 SUB REGISTRAR
2ND FLOOR, PERUMPILLY BUILDING MAHATHMAGANDI ROAD,
ABOVE KEERTHILAL JEWELLERY, KPCC JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682011
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER
(TAXES)
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER AND FIRST RESPONDENT IN WP(C):
1 BINU THOMAS MELEDAM
AGED 53 YEARS
MELEDATHUKADAMAKARA VILAKKUVATTOM P O PUNALUR,
KOLLAM-691305 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT:- A16B GARDEN
COURT, PADIVATTOM CIVIL LINE ROAD,
EDAPPALLY SOUTH P O, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682024
2 THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER
M/S HDB FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD, 2ND FLOOR,
THE ART OF LIVING TOWER, 13 CROSS ROAD,
SBT AVENUE, NEAR PASSPORT OFFICE PANAMPILLY NAGAR,
KOCHI, PIN - 682036
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 16 ::
2025:KER:53343
BY ADV.SRI.B.VINOD
BY ADV.SRI.PRADEESH CHACKO
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.07.2025 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.2008 OF 2024 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 17 ::
2025:KER:53343
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2025/30TH ASHADHA, 1947
W.A.NO.1676 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.05.2025 IN W.P(C).NO.6164 OF 2023
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 IN WP(C):
1 THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION,
EX-MAJOR R BALAKRISHNAN NAIR ROAD, NEAR DISTRICT COURT,
VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695035
2 THE SUB REGISTRAR
OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR, PANAVALLY PANAVALLY P O,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688526
3 THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, ALAPPUZHA
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688011
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
THAIKKATTUSSERY VILLAGE OFFICE, THAIKKATTUSSERY P O,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688528
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER
(TAXES)
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONERS AND 5TH RESPONDENT IN WP(C):
1 ASHAMOL K P
AGED 35 YEARS
W/O.ANILKUMAR, CHEERAMKUNNEL HOUSE, AREEPARAMBU,
CHERTHALA SOUTH VILLAGE, CHERTHALA SOUTH P O,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688539
2 M/S.HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED
AGED 38 YEARS
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 18 ::
2025:KER:53343
DOOR NO.39/6457 OF COCHIN CORPORATION, RAVIPURAM
JUNCTION, M.G.ROAD, THRIKKANARVATTOM DESOM, PERUMANOOR
P.O., PIN - 682 015, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR
TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED
OFFICER SRI.SACHIN A S, S/O T K SHANAVAS, AGED 38.
3 MUHAMMED NADEEM
HOUSE NO.11/116, R.K.PILLAI ROAD, THOPPUMPADY P.O.,
PALLURUTHY VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK (ADDITIONAL R5 IS
IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 11.04.2024 IN I.A.NO.3
OF 2023 IN WP(C).NO.6164 OF 2023), PIN - 682005
BY ADV.SRI.SABU JOHN
BY ADV.SRI.SHIJU VARGHESE
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.07.2025 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.2008 OF 2024 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 19 ::
2025:KER:53343
"C.R."
JUDGMENT
[W.A NOS.2008/2024, 1481/2025, 1482/2025, 1490/2025,
1491/2025, 1494/2025, 1504/2025, 1507/2025, 1539/2025,
1540/2025, 1585/2025 1672/2025 & 1676/2025]
Dr. A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.
As these writ appeals preferred by the State involve a common
issue, they are taken up together for consideration and disposed by this
common judgment. The issue that arises for consideration is whether a
sale certificate, issued by a bank/revenue authority to a purchaser of
immovable property, pursuant to a sale conducted at the instance of a
bank/financial institution/court/revenue authority of the property of a
revenue defaulter, will attract the levy of stamp duty under the Kerala
Stamp Act, 1959?
2. The writ petitions, from which these appeals arise, were filed
by various Banks/Financial Institutions/Auction purchasers who were
informed that stamp duty would have to be paid on the sale certificates
issued by/to them. It was the registering authority under the
Registration Act, 1908 who informed them of this requirement, when the
sale certificate in question was sent to the said authority for filing in
Book No.1 as required in terms of Section 89(4) of the Registration Act.
The writ court, by the judgments impugned in these appeals, allowed the
writ petitions by holding that the sale certificates issued to auction
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 20 ::
2025:KER:53343
purchasers were not instruments that attracted the levy of stamp duty
and, further, that the obligation of the registering authority under
Section 89(4) of the Registration Act was only to file a copy of the sale
certificate in Book No.1 and he could not insist on a payment of stamp
duty on the original of the document as a condition for discharging his
statutory duty. It is against the said findings that the State is in appeal
before us.
3. The submissions of Sri. Mohammed Rafiq, the learned Special
Government Pleader (Taxes) appearing on behalf of the State, briefly
stated, is as follows:
● A certificate of sale is a title deed that records and evidences
the right of ownership of immovable property in favour of the
purchaser; the discharge of liability to pay the sale price; the
acknowledgment of receipt of the sale price by the secured creditor;
the factum of handing over possession of the property to the
purchaser; the declaration as to the right of the purchaser to hold the
property free from encumbrances and the termination of security
interest held by the secured creditor over the property. The sale
certificate is therefore an instrument within the meaning of the term
under Section 2(j) of the Stamp Act.
● In Article 16 of the Schedule to the Stamp Act, a ‘certificate of
sale’ is mentioned as an instrument chargeable to duty at the same
rates as applicable to conveyances on consideration equal to the
purchase money. The specific inclusion of the certificate of sale as an
instrument in the Schedule is a legislative choice, and on a conjoint
reading of Section 2(j) and Section 3(a) of the Stamp Act read with
Article 16, there cannot be any doubt as regards whether a certificate
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 21 ::
2025:KER:53343
of sale qualifies as an instrument chargeable to stamp duty. It is also
significant that a certificate of sale issued by the Income Tax Recovery
Officer is liable to stamp duty as is a certificate issued by the
Recovery Officer [DRT] [See IN RE: Interplay between Arbitration
Agreements under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and
Stamp Act, 1899 – [(2024) 6 SCC 1]; Smt. Shanti Devi L. Singh
v. Tax Recovery Officer – [(1990) 3 SCC 605].
● Section 17 of the Stamp Act provides that all instruments
chargeable with duty and executed by any person in India shall be
stamped before or at the time of execution, and on a failure to comply
with such procedure, a penalty is envisaged under Section 62 of the
Stamp Act. Going by the definition of the expressions “executed” and
“execution” under Section 2(12) of the Indian Stamp Act 1899, the
stamping has to be done at the time of signing the instrument.
Accordingly, the applicable stamp duty has to be paid at the time of
signing of the sale certificate, and a non-payment of stamp duty will
visit the executors of the document with penalty/prosecution under
the Stamp Act.
● In as much as under the Registration Act, sale certificates are
subjected to a procedure which is tantamount to registration, a sale
certificate, the copy of which has been filed in Book No.1, has to be
seen as a registered document. It is therefore that a copy of the
certificate of sale that is not duly stamped when received by the
Registering authority under Section 89(4) of the Registration Act,
cannot be acted upon and no mandamus ought to be issued to the
Registering authority to file the same in Book No.1 [See Sub
Registrar v. Nadirsha – [2009 (1) KLT 630] and Gopalan Nair v.
Government of Kerala – [1986 KLT 549]].
4. Per contra, it is submitted by Sri. Mohan Jacob George and
Sri.B.Vinod, the learned counsel who appeared on behalf of the
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 22 ::
2025:KER:53343
respondent Banks/Financial Institutions/Auction purchasers, that the
impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge does not call for any
interference in the light of the well-settled position in law, as evidenced
by the judgments of the Supreme Court relied on by the learned Single
Judge in the impugned judgment.
5. We have considered the rival submissions, and have also gone
through the pleadings, statutory provisions and precedents cited before
us. To decide the issue in these cases, we have to consider the interplay
between the statutory provisions under the Registration Act, 1908 and
the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959. While the former is a regulatory legislation
traceable to Entry 6 of List III under the VII th Schedule to the
Constitution of India, the latter is a fiscal legislation traceable to Entry
44 of List III, as qualified by Entry 63 of List II thereof. The enforcement
of the provisions of a fiscal legislation has necessarily to be through the
machinery provided under that legislation, and not through the
machinery provided under a general regulatory legislation. We have
chosen to begin our discussion with the said observation because we find
that in these cases, the State has resorted to the provisions of the
Registration Act to try and recover dues under the Kerala Stamp Act.
6. The larger question, however, is whether the charge of stamp
duty under the Kerala Stamp Act is attracted to a sale certificate issued
by a bank/financial institution/revenue authority to an auction
purchaser? To answer the said question, we need to first notice the
relevant statutory provisions under the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959.
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 23 ::
2025:KER:53343
Section 2 (j):
2. Definitions: In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires:-
(j) “instrument” includes every document by which any right or liability is, or
purports to be, created, transferred, limited, extended, extinguished or recorded but
does not include a bill of exchange, promissory note, bill of lading, letter of credit,
policy of insurance, transfer of share, debenture, proxy and receipt.
3. Instruments chargeable with duty:- Subject to the provisions of this Act
and the exemptions contained in Schedule, the following instruments shall be
chargeable with duty of the amount indicated in that Schedule as the proper duty
therefore, respectively, that is to say –
(a) every instrument mentioned in the Schedule which, not having been
previously executed by any person, is executed in the territories of the State of Kerala
on or after commencement of this Act; and
(b) every instrument mentioned in that schedule which, not having been
previously executed by any person, is executed out of the State of Kerala on or after
that day relates to any property situate, or to any matter or thing done or to be done, in
the territories of the State of Kerala and is received in the territories of the State of
Kerala:
Provided that no duty shall be chargeable in respect of-
(1) any instrument, executed by, or on behalf of, or in favour of, the Central
Government of this or any other State Government in case where, but for this
exemption, the Central Government or the State Government, would be liable to pay
the duty chargeable in respect of such instrument;
(2) any instrument for sale, transfer or other disposition either absolutely or by
way of mortgage or otherwise of any ship or vessel or any part, interest, share or
property of or in any ship or vessel.
10. Duties how to be paid:- (1) Exempt as otherwise expressly provided in this
Act, all duties with which any instruments are chargeable shall be paid, and such
payment shall be indicated on such instruments, by means of stamps-
(a) according to the provisions herein contained; or
(b) when no such provision is applicable thereto, as the Government may by
rules direct.
(2) The rules made under sub section (1) may, among other matters, regulate,-
(a) in the case of each kind of instrument – the description of stamps which
may be used;
(b) in the case of instruments stamped with impressed stamps – the number of
stamps which may be used.
17. Instruments executed in the State of Kerala:- All instruments
chargeable with duty and executed by any person in the State of Kerala shall be
stamped before or at the time of execution.
30. Duties by whom payable:- In the absence of an agreement to the
contrary, the expense of providing the proper stamp shall be borne,-
(a) in the case of any instrument described in any of the following articles of
the Schedule, namely.–
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 24 ::
2025:KER:53343
No.2 (Administration Bond),
No.6 (Agreement relating to deposit to title deeds, pawn or pledge),
No.13 (Bond),
No.14 (Bottomary Bond),
No.25 (Customs Bond or Central Excise Bond),
No.30 (Further Charge),
No.32 (indemnity Bond),
No.37 (Mortgage Deed),
No.48 (Release),
No.49 (Respondentia Bond),
No.50 (Security Bond or Mortgage Deed),
No.51 (Settlement),
No.55 (c) (Transfer of any interest secured by a Bond or Mortgage Deed), by
the person drawing, making or executing such instrument;
(b) In the case of a conveyance (including a reconveyance of mortgaged
property) by the grantee; in the case of a lease or agreement to lease
by the lessee or intended lessee;
(c) in the case of a counterpart of lease ————— by the lessor;
(cc) in the case of a certificate of enrolment in the roll of advocates
maintained by the State Bar Council ———— by the Advocate enrolled.
(d) in the case of an instrument of exchange ——– by the parties in equal
shares;
(e) in the case of a certificate of sale —— by the purchaser of the property
to which such certificate relates; and
(f) in the case of an instrument of partition ———– by the parties thereto in
proportion to their respective shares in the whole property partitioned, or,
when the partition is made in execution of an order passed by a Revenue
Authority or Civil Court or Aabitrator, in such proportion as such Authority or
Court or arbitrator directs.
31. Adjudication as to proper stamp:- (1) When any instrument, whether
executed or not and previously stamped or not is brought to the Collector, and the
person bringing it applies to have the opinion of that officers as to duty, if any, with
which it is chargeable, and pays a fee of such amount not exceeding ten rupees and not
less than one rupees) as the Collector may in each case direct, the Collector shall
determine the duty, if any, with which, in his judgment, the instrument is chargeable.
(2) For this purpose the Collector may require to be furnished with an abstract
of the instrument, and also with such affidavit or other evidence as he may deem
necessary to prove that all the facts and circumstances affecting the chargeability of the
instrument with duly, or the amount of the duly with which it is chargeable, are fully
and truly set forth therein, and may refuse to proceed upon any such application, until
such abstract and evidence have been furnished accordingly:
Provided that-
(a) no evidence furnished in pursuance of this section shall be used against any
person in any civil proceeding except in any enquiry as to the duty with which the
instrument to which it relates is chargeable; and
(b) every person by whom any such evidence is furnished shall, on payment of
full duty with which the instrument to which it relates, is chargeable, be relieved from
any penalty which he may have incurred under this Act by reason of the omission to
state truly in such instrument any of the facts or circumstances aforesaid.
33. Examination and impounding of instruments:- (1) Every person
having by law or consent of parties authority to receive evidence, and every person in
charge of a public office, except an Officer of Police, before whom any instrument,
chargeable in his opinion, with duty, is produced or comes in this performance of his
functions, shall, if it appears to him that such instrument in no duly stamped, impound
the same.
(2) For that purpose every such person shall examine every instrument so
chargeable and so produced or coming before him, in order to ascertain whether it is
stamped with a stamp of the value and description required by the law in force in the
State when such instrument was executed or first executed:
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 25 ::
2025:KER:53343
Provided that-
(a) nothing herein contained shall be deemed to require any Magistrate or
Judge of a Criminal Court to examine or impound, if he does not think fit to do, any
instrument coming before him in the course of any proceeding other than proceeding
under Chapter XII or Chapter XXXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1898;
(b) in the case of a Judge of the High Court, the duty of examining and
impounding any instrument under this section may be delegated to such officer as the
Court appoints in his behalf.
(3) For the purpose of this section, in cases of doubt, the Government may
determine-
(a) what offices shall be deemed to be public offices; and
(b) who shall be deemed to be persons in charge of public offices.
34. Instrument not duly stamped inadmissible in evidence, etc:- No
instrument chargeable with duty shall be admitted in evidence for any purpose by any
person having by law or consent of parties authority to receive evidence or shall be
acted upon, registered or authentication by any such person or by any public officer,
unless such instrument is duly stamped.
Provided that-
(a) any such instrument not being an instrument chargeable with a duty of
twenty paise or less than twenty paise shall, subject to all just exceptions, be admitted
in evidence on payment of the duty with which the same is chargeable, or, in the case of
an instrument insufficiently stamped, of the amount required to make up such duty,
together with a penalty to ten rupees or, when ten times the amount of the proper duty
or deficient portion thereof exceeds ten rupees, of sum equal to twenty times such duty
or portion;
(b) any such instrument, when presented to a Registering Officer for
registration, shall be registered, if the party agrees to pay the duty and penalty due
thereon as decided by the Registering Officer and pays the same within seven days from
the date.
(c) where a contract or agreement of any kind is effected by correspondence
consisting of two or more letters and any one of the letters bears the proper stamp, the
contract or agreement shall be deemed to be duly stamped;
(d) nothing herein contained shall prevent the admission of any instrument in
evidence in any proceeding in a Criminal Court, other than a proceeding under Chapter
XII or Chapter XXXVI of the Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1898;
(e) nothing herein contained shall prevent the admission of any instrument in
any Court when such instrument has been executed by or on behalf of the Government,
or where it bears the certificate of the Collector as provided by Section 32 or any other
provision of this Act.
37. Instruments impounded how dealt with:- (1) When the person
impounding as instrument under section 33 has by law or consent of parties authority to
receive evidence and admits such instrument in evidence or when he is a registering
officer to register such instrument upon payment of a penalty as provided by Section 34
or of duty as provided by Section 36, he shall send to the Collector an authenticated
copy of such instrument, together with a certificate in writing, stating the amount of
duty and penalty levied in respect thereof, and shall send such amount to the Collector
or to such person as he may appoint in this behalf.
(2) in every other case, the person so impounding an instrument shall send it in
original to the Collector.
42. Prosecution for offence against Stamp Law:- The taking of proceedings
or the payment of a penalty under this Chapter in respect of any instrument shall not
bar the prosecution of any person who appears to have committed an offence the law
relating to stamps in respect of such instrument:
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 26 ::
2025:KER:53343
Provided that no such prosecution shall be instituted in the case of any
instrument in respect of which such a penalty has been paid, unless it appears to the
Collector that the offence was committed with an intention of evading payment of the
proper duty.
46. Recovery of duties and penalties:- All duties, penalties and other sums
required to be paid under this Chapter may be recovered by the Collector by distress
and sale of the movable property of the person from whom the same are due, or by any
other process for the time being in force for the recovery of arrears of land revenue.
16. Certificate of sale (in respect The same duty as on a conveyance
of each property put up as a (No.21 or 22 as the case may be)
separate lot and sold) granted to for a consideration equal to the
the purchaser of any property sold amount of the purchase money only.
by public auction by a Civil or
Revenue Court or by the
Government, Collector or other
Revenue Officer.
7. The provisions of the Kerala Stamp Act extracted above clearly
indicate that if a document satisfies the criteria of being an “instrument”
as defined under Section 2(j) of the Act, it attracts the charge under
Section 3, and the procedural provisions under the Act that follow
facilitates the collection of revenue due in respect of that instrument
from the person liable to pay the same. Towards that end, the statutory
provisions also permit the instrument in question to be impounded by
persons in charge of a public office or those empowered by law to
receive evidence and those empowered to receive evidence by consent of
parties.
8. The question as to whether a sale certificate qualifies to be an
‘instrument’ for the purposes of the Stamp Act and, if so, at what stage,
has been considered by the Supreme Court in a plethora of cases. It
would suffice for our purposes to notice only the recent judgment of the
Supreme Court in State of Punjab & Another v. Ferrous Alloy
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 27 ::
2025:KER:53343
Forgings (P) Ltd. & Ors – [2024 SCC Online SC 3372], where after
referring to the earlier precedents in Municipal Corporation of Delhi
v. Pramod Kumar Gupta – [(1991) 1 SCC 633], Smt. Shanti Devi L.
Singh v. Tax Recovery Officer – [(1990) 3 SCC 605], B. Arvind
Kumar v. Govt. of India – [(2007) 5 SCC 745], the court found for the
purposes of the Registration Act that, a sale certificate issued to the
purchaser pursuant to the confirmation of an auction sale, is merely
evidence of such title and does not require registration under Section
17(1) of that Act. The court also observed that it is not the issuance of
the sale certificate that transfers the title in the property in favour of the
auction purchaser and that the title is transferred upon successful
completion of the sale and its confirmation by the competent authority
after all objections against the sale have been disposed of. This last
observation of the court is significant for our present purposes since, as
already noticed, the definition of ‘instrument’ under the Kerala Stamp
Act, takes within its fold only such documents by which “any right or
liability is, or purports to be, created, transferred, limited, extended,
extinguished or recorded”. Accordingly, it is only if and when the sale
certificate in question creates, transfers, limits, extends, extinguishes or
records a right or liability in praesenti that it becomes an ‘instrument’
for the purposes levy of stamp duty. A sale certificate, at the time of its
issuance to an auction purchaser, does none of the above since it only
records the fact of a transaction of sale having been concluded between
the parties, without going further to adjudicate or express any opinion on
the rights or liabilities of the parties to the said transaction. We are
therefore clear in our minds that, at the time of its issuance to an auction
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 28 ::
2025:KER:53343
purchaser, a sale certificate cannot be seen as an “instrument”, and
consequently will not attract the levy of stamp duty under the Kerala
Stamp Act.
9. The next question that arises would be, whether a sale
certificate can partake the character of an ‘instrument’ at any stage after
its issuance? In our view, there may be circumstances when the auction
purchaser seeks a registration of the sale certificate with a view to firmly
securing his rights in relation to the property covered by the sale
certificate. Recently, in Uma Devi & Ors v. Anand Kumar & Ors –
[(2025) 5 SCC 198], the Supreme Court quoted with approval its
earlier decision in Suraj Lamp & Industries (P) Ltd (2) v. State of
Haryana – [(2012) 1 SCC 656], where it was observed that:
“Registration provides safety and security to transactions relating to immovable property,
even if the document is lost or destroyed. It gives publicity and public exposure to documents
thereby preventing forgeries and frauds in regard to transactions and execution of documents.
Registration provides information to people who may deal with a property, as to the nature and
extent of the rights which persons may have, affecting that property. In other words, it enables
people to find out whether any particular property with which they are concerned, has been
subjected to any legal obligation or liability and who is or are the person(s) presently having right,
title, and interest in the property. It gives solemnity of form and perpetuate documents which are of
legal importance or relevance by recording them, where people may see the record and enquire and
ascertain what the particulars are and as far as land is concerned what obligations exist with regard
to them. It ensures that every person dealing with immovable property can rely with confidence
upon the statements contained in the registers (maintained under the said Act) as a full and
complete account of all transactions by which the title to the property may be affected and secure
extracts/copies duly certified”
10. As is apparent from the above observations of the Court, the
registration of a document, that is otherwise not compulsorily registrable
under the Registration Act, confers certain advantages to the person
securing rights under the said document, subject to an adjudication
process at the instance of the registering authority concerned. These
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 29 ::
2025:KER:53343
aspects were noticed by the Supreme Court in Smt. Shanti Devi L.
Singh v. Tax Recovery Officer and Others – [(1990) 3 SCC 605],
where while clarifying the distinction between the process of registration
of a document and a mere filing of the same in terms of Section 89 (4) of
the Registration Act, the Court found as follows:
“7. This takes us to the second question as to whether filing of a copy of the
certificate in Book No. 1 within the meaning of Section 89 is tantamount to the
registration of the document under the Registration Act or it is a totally different
concept. The registration of a document under the Act is conditional on the fulfillment of
several requirements (Sections 32 to 35). The document has to be presented for
registration by a person competent to do so. The persons executing the document should
appear before the Sub-Registrar and admit or deny execution of the document. The Sub-
Registrar may conduct an enquiry, where needed, to satisfy himself as to the proper
execution of the document. He will decide to admit the document to registration only if
he is satisfied on this. What he has to do once he admits a document to registration is
laid down in Sections 51 to 67. First, he is bound to endorse full particulars and details
of the registration on the document presented to him and also obtain the signature of
every person presenting the document. He should then, without delay copy the entire
document in the appropriate book maintained for the purpose (which, in respect of non-
testamentary instruments relating to immovable property, is Book No. 1). The entries in
each book nave to be consecutively numbered year-wise and corresponding entries
should be contemporaneously made in current indices to be maintained in every office.
The officer should affix his signatures to the endorsements made in his presence and
then endorse a certificate on the document that it is registered together with the
registration particulars which shall be signed, sealed and dated by him. The document is
then returned to the person presenting it for registration. The books and indices are
available for public inspection and certified copies thereof are to be given to parties
applying for them. This, in brief, is the process of registration.
8. On the other hand, the process of filing that is contemplated under the Act is
somewhat different though the Act does interchange the two expressions in some places.
For instance, Section 51(2) itself refers to all documents or memoranda registered under
Section 89 being entered or filed in Book No. 1. But there appear to be vital differences
between the two processes:
(i) It is the original of a document that is registered whereas only copies or memoranda are
filed;
(ii) The executant of a document which is required to be registered, has to present it for
registration and go through the attendant and subsequent processes described above. A copy
to be filed under Section 89 or memoranda that are filed under Sections 64 to 66 is simply
transmitted to the concerned Sub-Registrar for being filed. Apparently, the procedure of
presentation is dispensed with in regard to the latter because they are issued by public
authorities dis- charging their official duties.
(iii) Additional particulars relevant to a document admitted to registration need to be got
endorsed thereon from time to time as contemplated in Sections 58 and 59 but this rule does
not apply to a copy or memorandum filed under the Act.
(iv) When a document is registered, the entirety of the document has to be copied
out into the relevant book and the original document returned to the person who
presents the document with necessary endorsements. This requirement is absent
in the case of a copy or memorandum which is just filed.
(v) Where a document is registered, a certificate of registration has to be issued
which will be admissible to prove the due registration of the document.
9. There are thus some differences between the two procedures and this aspect
has been touched upon in some very early decisions under the Registration Act, 1877:
vide, Fatteh Singh v. Daropadi, [1908] Punj. Rec. Case No. 142; Siraj-un-nissa v. Jan
Muhammad, 2 All WN 51, Masarat-un- nissa v. Adit Ram, [1883] I.L.R. 5 All. 568 (F.B.).
Reference may also be made to Premier Vegetable P. Ltd. v. Staate of M.P., AIR 1986 M.P.
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 30 ::
2025:KER:53343
258. We need not, however, consider for the purposes of this case whether filing and
registration mean one and the same thing for all purposes and’ what the legal effect of
these differences is. For, though the processes are different, the purchaser at a court or
revenue sale is under no disadvantage because of the lack of registration. The certificate
of sale itself not being a compulsorily registrable document: vide Section 17(2)(xii), the
transfer of title in his favour is not vitiated by the non- registration of the certificate. The
copy of the certificate filed in Book No. 1 contains all the relevant details. These details
are reflected in the indices maintained under Section 55 which are open to inspection to
all persons. [We may point out here that Section 55(2) only refers to memoranda filed but
it seems clear, particularly in the light of various State amendments, that the index to
Book No. 1 should also contain the details of copies of document filed by him]. These
requirements are sufficient to ensure that any person in- tending to purchase or deal
with the property is put on notice about the principal contents of the certificate of sale
provided he inspects the relevant book and/or index. It is sufficient to say, for the
purposes of this case, that all that the Sub-Registrar required to do is to file the copy of
the certificate in Book No. 1 and no more. He does not have to copy out the certificate or
make any other entries in Book No. 1.”
11. We would think, therefore, that the precedents referred to
above amply clarify that a sale certificate, which is not an ‘instrument’ at
the time of its issuance, can nevertheless metamorphose into one when
its original is presented for registration before a registering authority. In
that event, the registering authority would be called upon to examine the
nature of the rights flowing to the person seeking registration of the
certificate, after examining the document and satisfying himself that the
document was properly executed, and thereafter copy the contents of the
document into Book No.1 maintained for that purpose. It is only when
the sale certificate thus becomes an ‘instrument’ that it will attract the
charge of stamp duty under the Kerala Stamp Act, and the duty
chargeable in terms of Article 16 thereof becomes payable by the auction
purchaser concerned.
12. In this context, we must hasten to add that even if an
instrument is insufficiently stamped, and is liable to be impounded, what
is affected is only its admissibility in evidence and not its validity as the
document that it purports to be. This position is now well settled and was
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 31 ::
2025:KER:53343
recently restated by a larger bench of the Supreme Court in IN RE:
Interplay between Arbitration Agreements under Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 and Stamp Act, 1899 – [(2024) 6 SCC 1]. We
cannot therefore accept the submission of the learned Government
Pleader appearing on behalf of the appellant State that the copy of an
unstamped sale certificate cannot be seen as a valid document, including
for the purposes of the Registration Act.
13. We must now deal with the provisions of the Registration Act,
and particularly those that deal with the role of the registering authority
under Section 89 (4) thereof.
Section 17(1) (b) & (c):
17. Documents of which registration is compulsory.– (1) The following
documents shall be registered, if the property to which they relate is situate in a district
in which, and if they have been executed on or after the date on which, Act No. XVI of
1864, or the Indian Registration Act, 1866, or the Indian Registration Act, 1871, or the
Indian Registration Act, 1877, or this Act came or comes into force, namely:–
(a) xxxxxxxx
(b) other non-testamentary instruments which purport or operate to create,
declare, assign, limit or extinguish, whether in present or in future, any right, title or
interest, whether vested or contingent, of the value of one hundred rupees and upwards,
to or in immovable property;
(c) non-testamentary instruments which acknowledge the receipt or payment of
any consideration on account of the creation, declaration, assignment, limitation or
extinction of any such right, title or interest.
17. Documents of which registration is compulsory.–
(2) Nothing in clauses (b) and (c) of sub-section (1) applies to–
(xii) any certificate of sale granted to the purchaser of any property sold by
public auction by a Civil or Revenue Officer.
18. Documents of which registration is optional.–Any of the following
documents may be registered under this Act, namely:–
(f) all other documents not required by Section 17 to be registered.
23. Time for presenting documents.–Subject to the provisions contained in
sections 24, 25 and 26, no document other than a will shall be accepted for registration
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 32 ::
2025:KER:53343
unless presented for that purpose to the proper officer within four months from the date
of its execution:
Provided that a copy a of a decree or order may be presented within four months
from the day on which the decree or order was made, or, where it is appealable, within
four months from the day on which it becomes final.
32. Persons to present documents for registration.– Except in the cases
mentioned in Sections 31, 88 and 89, every document to be registered under this Act,
whether such registration be compulsory or optional, shall be presented at the proper
registration-office,–
(a) by some person executing or claiming under the same, or, in the case of a
copy of a decree or order, claiming under the decree or order, or
(b) by the representive or assign of such a person, or
(c) by the agent of such a person, representative or assign, duly authorised by
power-of-attorney executed and authenticated in manner hereinafter mentioned.
48. Registered documents relating to property when to take effect
against oral agreements.– All non-testamentary documents duly registered under this
Act, and relating to any property, whether movable or immovable, shall take effect
against any order agreement or declaration relating to such property, unless where the
agreement or declaration has been accompanied or followed by delivery of possession
and the same constitutes a valid transfer under any law for the time being in force:
Provided that a mortgage as defined in section 58 of the Transfer of Property
Act, 1882 (4 of 1882), shall take effect against any mortgage-deed subsequently executed
and registered which relates to the same property.
58. Particulars to be endorsed on documents admitted to registration.–
(1) On every document admitted to registration, other than a copy of a decree or order,
or a copy sent to a registering officer under Section 89, there shall be endorsed from
time to time the following particulars, namely:–
(a) the signature and addition of every person admitting the execution of the
document, and, if such execution has been admitted by the representative, assign or
agent of any person, the signature and addition of such representative, assign or agent;
(b) the signature and addition of every person examined in reference to such
document under any of the provisions of this Act; and
(c) any payment of money or delivery of goods made in the presence of the
registering officer in reference to the execution of the document, and any admission of
receipt of consideration, in whole or in part, made in his presence in reference to such
execution.
(2) If any person admitting the execution of a document refuses to endorse the same, the
registering officer shall nevertheless register it, but shall at the same time endorse a
note of such refusal.
59. Endorsements to be dated and signed by registering officer.–The
registering officer shall affix the date and his signature to all endorsements made under
Sections 52 and 58, relating to the same document and made in his presence on the
same day.
60. Certificate of registration.–(1) After such of the provisions of Sections
34, 35, 58 and 59 as apply to any document presented for registration have been
complied with, the registering officer shall endorse thereon a certificate containing the
word “registered”, together with the number and page of the book in which the true copy
of the document has been filed.
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 33 ::
2025:KER:53343
Section 61:
61. Endorsements and certificate to be copied and document returned.–
(1) The endorsements and certificate referred to and mentioned in Sections 59 and 60
shall thereupon be copied into the margin of the Register-book, and the copy of the map
or plan (if any) mentioned in Section 21 shall also be filed along with the tue copy of the
document.
(2) The registration of the document shall thereupon be deemed complete, and
the document shall then be returned to the person, who presented the same for
registration, or to such other person (if any) as he has nominated in writing in that behalf
on the receipt mentioned in Section 52.
Section 89:
89. Copies of certain orders, certificates and instruments to be sent to
registering officers and filed.–(1) xxxxx
(2) Every Court granting a certificate of sale of immovable property under the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), shall send a copy of such certificate to the
registering officer within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the whole or any part of
the immovable property comprised in such certificate is situate, and such officer shall file
the copy in his Book No. 1.
(3) xxxx
(4) Every Revenue Officer granting a certificate of sale to the purchaser of
immovable property sold by public auction shall send a copy of the certificate to the
registering officer within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the whole or any part of
the immovable property comprised in the certificate is situate, and such officer shall file
the copy in his Book No. 1.
(5) Every Court passing-
(a) any decree or order creating, declaring, transferring, limiting or
extinguishing any right, title or interest to or in immovable property in favour of or of any
person, or
(b) an order for the attachment of immovable property or for the
release of any immovable property from attachment,
shall send a copy of such decree or order together with a memorandum describing the
property, as far as may be practicable in the manner required by Section 21, to the
Registering Officer within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the whole or any part of
the immovable property comprised in such decree or order is situate, and such officer
shall file the copy and memorandum in his Book No.1.
(6) Every officer issuing a written demand before the attachment of the
immovable property of a defaulter under the Revenue Recovery Act for the time being in
force shall-
(a) send a copy of such written demand together with a memorandum
describing the property, as far as may be practicable in the manner required by Section
21; and
(b) where such written demand is withdrawn or attachment of the property is
lifted or the property s sold and the same is confirmed, send a memorandum indicating
that fact and describing the property, as far as may be practicable in the manner
required by Section 21,
to the registering officer within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the whose or any
part of the immovable property to which the written demand relates is situate and such
registering officer shall file the copy of the written demand and the memoranda in his
Book No. 1.
14. The distinction between the process of registration of a
document and a mere filing of a document in terms of Section 89(4) has
already been noticed above through the judgment in Smt.Shanti Devi
L. Singh (supra). What is also clear from the statutory provisions under
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 34 ::
2025:KER:53343
the Registration Act is that the stringent regulations envisaged
thereunder are in respect of the documents in original. In other words,
when it comes to copies of the documents, the statute does not prescribe
stringent terms. It is with this understanding that we must analyse the
role of the registering authority with regard to sale certificates
presented before him for filing in terms of Section 89(4) of the
Registration Act. As was observed by the Supreme Court in Ferrous
Alloy Forgings (P) Ltd. (supra), the sale certificate issued by the
authorised officer is not compulsorily registrable. Under Section 89(4) of
the Registration Act the registering authority is only required to file a
copy of the sale certificate as and when it is forwarded to him by the
authorised officer. Such filing of the copy of the sale certificate is merely
intended to inform persons interested in the property, of the
circumstances under which the property came into the hands of its
present title holder. It is only when the said title holder uses the original
of the sale certificate for some other purpose that the requirement of
payment of stamp duty etc. would arise.
15. The upshot of the above discussions is that we find the
judgments impugned in these writ appeals to be legally unassailable.
While the registering authority under the Registration Act cannot
exercise his powers under Sections 33 or 34 of the Kerala Stamp Act in
relation to the copy of a sale certificate that is sent to him for filing in
terms of Section 89(4) of the Registration Act, even the original of the
sale certificate concerned will not attract the levy of stamp duty under
the Kerala Stamp Act, save in the exceptional circumstances when it
W.A.No.2008/24
& con. cases :: 35 ::
2025:KER:53343
qualifies to be an instrument as defined under the Kerala Stamp Act.
The Writ Appeals preferred by the State, therefore, fail and are
accordingly dismissed. No Costs.
Sd/-
DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGESd/-
P.M. MANOJ
JUDGE
prp/