Execution Of Document Does Not Stand Admitted Merely Because A Person Admits To Having Signed It: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that the execution of a document/deed does not stand admitted merely because a person admits to having signed the document/deed.

The "term" execution in Section 35(1)(a) Registration Act means that a person has signed a document after having fully understood it and consented to its terms, the bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud, AS Bopanna and Bela M. Trivedi observed.

The court added that in a situation where an individual admits their signature on a document but denies its execution, the Sub-Registrar is bound to refuse registration in accordance with Sections 35(3)(a) of the Registration Act.

Background

Veena Singh allegedly had entered into two agreements with a developer – Gujral Associates. Later a sale deed was purported to have been executed by her in favour of the developer based upon the agreement to sell and upon the payment of the remaining sale consideration.  The developer presented the sale deed for registration before the Sub-Registrar-I, Bareilly. In response to a notice from the Sub-Registrar, the Veena Singh appeared and submitted an objection in writing, with a request not to execute the incomplete and forged sale deed. She alleged that the developer had been harassing her into forcibly signing the sale deed in respect of her property and that they furnished her with misleading and false information in order to get her to sign the papers, all the while even forcing her to hide the transaction from the members of her own family. Accepting these objections, the Sub-Registrar having refused to order the registration of the sale deed. In appeal filed by the developer, the District Registrar set aside the Sub-Registrar's decision and ordered the registration of the sale deed. This order of the District Registrar was challenged before the High Court by Veena Singh by filing a writ petition. The High Court dismissed the writ petition while giving liberty to move the civil court for a declaration that the sale deed had been obtained by fraud and was a nullity.

Section 35(1)(a) Registration Act

Section 35 (1) (a) of the Registration Act reads as follows : If all the persons executing the document appear personally before the registering officer and are personally known to him, or if he be otherwise satisfied that they are the persons they represent themselves to be, and if they all admit the execution of the document... the registering officer shall register the document as directed in Sections 58 to 61, inclusive.

Contentions Raised

Before the Apex Court, the appellant's (Veena Singh's legal heirs) contention was that even if a person's signature on the document admitted, they can still deny its execution if they did not agree to or understand the contents of the document while signing it. On the other hand, the respondent contended that once a person admits to their signature on a document, they admit to having executed it. 

The main issue therefore considered by the court was whether the appellant's admission of her signatures and thumb impressions/fingerprints on the sale deed also amounts to an admission of its "execution".

Meaning of "execution

Referring to various authorities on the meaning of "execution", the bench observed that the the admission of one's signature on a document is not equivalent to admission of its execution. It said: 

The "execution" of a document does not stand admitted merely because a person admits to having signed the document. Such an interpretation accounts for circumstances where an individual signs a blank paper and it is later converted into a different document, or when an individual is made to sign a document without fully understanding its contents. Adopting a contrary interpretation would unfairly put the burden upon the person denying execution to challenge the registration before a civil court or a writ court, since registration will have to be allowed once the signature has been admitted...

..In a situation where an individual admits their signature on a document but denies its execution, the Sub-Registrar is bound to refuse registration in accordance with Sections 35(3)(a) of the Registration Act. Subsequently, if an application if filed under Section 73, the Registrar is entrusted with the power of conducting an enquiry of a quasi-judicial nature under Section 74. If the Registrar passes an order refusing registration under Section 76, the party presenting the document for registration has the remedy of filing a civil suit under Section 77 of the Registration Act, where a competent civil court will be able to adjudicate upon the question of fact conclusively.

On Mislabelling of application under Section 73

Yet another contention raised by the appellant was that the execution of the sale deed had been denied by the appellant and the Sub-Registrar refused registration on that ground under Section 35(3)(a) and therefore no appeal would be maintainable under Section 72.

"If a person by whom the document is purported to be executed denies its execution and registration is refused on those grounds, an appeal against the order of the Sub-Registrar denying execution would not be maintainable under Section 72 of the Registration Act.. But mis-labelling of an application under Section 73 as an appeal under Section 72 would by itself not vitiate the proceedings before the Registrar.", the court observed.

While allowing the appeal, the bench further observed:

In the impugned judgment, the Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court has observed that registration does not depend upon the consent of the executant but on the Registrar's finding that the executant had actually signed the document. The High Court held that having found in the course of the enquiry that the sale deed was duly prepared by a scribe, that the attesting witness had stated that the sale deed was signed by the appellant and she also placed her fingerprints in their presence, it was open to the Registrar to direct registration in spite of a denial of its execution by the appellant. In doing so, the Single Judge of the High Court has, with respect, conflated the mere signing of the sale deed with its execution. For the reasons mentioned earlier in this judgment, such an approach is completely erroneous and cannot be upheld.

Case details

Veena Singh (D) vs District Registrar/Additional Collector (F/R) | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 462 | CA 2929 of 2022 | 10 May 2022

Coram: Justices DY Chandrachud, AS Bopanna and Bela M. Trivedi 

Counsel: Sr. Adv Pradeep Kant for appellant, Sr. Adv V K Shukla for respondent

Headnotes

Registration Act, 1908  ; Section 35 - The "execution" of a document does not stand admitted merely because a person admits to having signed the document - In a situation where an individual admits their signature on a document but denies its execution, the Sub-Registrar is bound to refuse registration in accordance with Sections 35(3)(a).  (Para 57,64)

Constitution of India, 1950 ; Article 226 - An order of the Registrar directing the registration of a document is amenable to a challenge under Article 226 of the Constitution - The mere existence of the remedy available before a civil court, under Section 9 of the CPC to avoid the document or to seek a declaration in regard to its invalidity, will not divest a person, who complains that the order passed by Registrar for the registration of the document was contrary to statutory provisions, of the remedy which is available in the exercise of a court's writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. (Para 30)

Registration Act, 1908 ; Section 72 - If a person by whom the document is purported to be executed denies its execution and registration is refused on those grounds, an appeal against the order of the Sub-Registrar denying execution would not be maintainable under Section 72 of the Registration Act. (Para 33)

Registration Act, 1908 ; Section 72,73 - Mis-labelling of an application under Section 73 as an appeal under Section 72 would by itself not vitiate the proceedings before the Registrar. (Para 38)

Registration Act, 1908 ; Section 35, 73,74 - While the Sub-Registrar under Section 35(3)(a) has to mandatorily refuse registration when the execution of a document is denied by the person purported to have executed the document, the Registrar is entrusted with the power to conduct an enquiry on an application under Section 73 by following the procedure under Section 74. (Para 35)

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment