[Transfer Of Possessory Rights] Sub-Registrar Can't Refuse Registration For Lack Of Prior Title Documents: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court recently reiterated that the inability of persons transferring possessory rights to produce prior title documents is not a valid reason for the Sub Registrar to refuse registration.

Justice Gopinath P thus emphasised that possessory rights can be transferred without any legal barriers, emphasising that the Sub Registrar should not inquire into the nature of possession, whether based on lease or title and only the rights possessed by the petitioner could be conveyed to the transferee. 

"The persons executing the document can only transfer the right that they have and merely because they are purporting to transfer possessory rights and they are not been able to produce any prior documents cannot be a ground for the Sub Registrar to refuse registration."

The petitioners had approached the Court aggrieved by the order of Sub Registrar refusing to register their documents citing that they had not produced prior documents.

Advocate V.A Johnson appearing for the petitioners argued that the Sub Registrar is not authorized to insist on the production of prior documents, citing the judgment in Sumathi v. State of Kerala [2018 (5) KHC 586].

Government Pleader Deepa V contended that the requirement of prior documents was only necessary because the petitioners claimed to have obtained "verumpattam" rights over the property. However, the petitioners argued that possessory rights can be transferred and since the property in question is not government land, the Sub Registrar could not deny the registration.

Justice Gopinath observed that in the Sumathi judgment, it was held that in the light of the provisions contained in Section 17 of the Registration Act, the Sub Registrar is not authorised to insist that the executant must produce prior documents. Thus, the Court held petitioner was right in contending that it is open for persons to transfer possessory rights. 

The Court concluded that the same principle should apply in these cases, and the refusal of registration based on the absence of prior documents is unjustified. Therefore, the court allowed the writ petitions, ordering the registration of the documents without the requirement of prior documents.

As a result, the Court allowed the petitions, ordering the registration of the documents subject to compliance with usual formalities without insisting on the production of prior documents.

Case Title: Balachandran v. Sub Registrar and connected matters

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 341

Click Here To Read/Download The Order