Pleadings In Civil Suit Not Document/Instrument, Cannot Be Registered By Authorities Or Entered In Encumbrance Certificate: Madras HC

Justice Anand Venkatesh made the observations noting that previously, the courts have ruled in favour of registering pleadings to ensure that an innocent purchaser is not put into distress. The court observed that though the earlier directions were well intended, it had a flip side to it and if allowed to continue, it would result in more confusion.

“This Court holds that pleadings that are filed in a civil suit does not assume the character of a document or an instrument and in such an event, the Registration Act and the Stamp Act will not come into play and consequently, pleadings cannot be entertained and registered and no entries can be made in the encumbrance certificate. In view of the same, the Inspector General of registration need not issue any circular in this regard,” the court observed.

The court was hearing a petition filed by Gunasekaran to delete an entry made in the encumbrance certificate relating to his property based on an order passed by the Additional District Judge, Dharmapuri, refusing to grant the relief of temporary injunction to the respondents pending the suit. The petitioner submitted that since the order had been recorded in the encumbrance certificate, it was creating problems to the petitioner to deal with the property.

During the course of the hearing, the court was informed that there were earlier orders of the court stating that even a certified copy of the plaint in the suit must be entertained and registered by the registration department. The special government pleader informed the court that if such registration was entertained, the department would be flooded with plaints in various suits. Both the counsels argued that the department should not have entertained the interim order since it did not create any right on the parties.

The court agreed with the counsels and noted that the pleadings did not fulfil the requirement of instrument under the Registration Act or the Stamp Act. The court added that in such a case, the court could not direct the registering authority to register the pleadings and make entries in the encumbrance certificate.

“The pleadings perse does not satisfy any of the requirements under Section 17 and/or 18 of the Registration Act. Similarly, the pleadings does not satisfy the requirements of the definition of an instrument under Section 2 (14) of the Stamp Act. If that is so, a Court through a judicial fiat cannot direct the registering authority to register the pleadings and make the necessary entries in the encumbrance certificate. Even though, such directions are well intended, it has a flip side to it,” the court said.

The court also observed that it was for the legislature to bring amendments to the Registration Act and Stamp Act to deal with a property pending litigation, and it was not for the courts to issue directions that are contrary to the existing laws in force.

The court thus allowed the plea and directed the Sub-Registrar to delete the entries in the encumbrance certificate within two weeks.

Counsel for Petitioner: Ms. S. Sucharitha

Counsel for Respondents: Mr. P. Harish, Government Advocate

Case Title: M. Gunasekaran v. The District Registrar and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 100

Case No: WP No. 4176 of 2025