Conviction Under Section 409 IPC Postulates Strict Proof Of Entrustment; Suspicion However Grave Cannot Substitute Proof: Supreme Court Criminal Prosecution Emanating From Past Matrimonial Relationship Ought Not To Linger After Divorce: Supreme Court Negligence Of Previous Counsel Not A Ground To Reopen Concluded Pre-Charge Evidence Under Section 311 CrPC: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell Cannot Protect Tenant's Possession Under Section 53A Transfer Of Property Act: Delhi High Court Certified Copies Of Registered Sale Deeds Admissible As Secondary Evidence Without Proving Loss Of Original: Gauhati High Court Counsel Representing Deceased Party Must Inform Court Of Death Under Order XXII Rule 10-A CPC: J&K High Court Son Staying In Father's House Out Of Love And Affection Is A Mere Licensee, Cannot Challenge Father's Title: Delhi High Court Conviction For Murder Cannot Stand Where Single Blow Inflicted In Sudden Fight Without Premeditation: Uttarakhand High Court Inability To Trace Suppliers Or Buyers No Ground For Custodial Interrogation Once Recovery Is Effected: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Assemble Peacefully To Celebrate Association Anniversary Is A Fundamental Right; Unlawful Assembly Per Se Not An Offence: Madras High Court Marriage Photographs Can Be Relied Upon To Estimate Quantity Of Gold Ornaments In Matrimonial Disputes: Kerala High Court POCSO Act Not Confined To Securing Convictions, Soul Of Law Lies In Preserving Childhood Dignity & Healing: Madras High Court Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Accused Languishing In Jail For 9 Years Deserves Bail; Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Violated: Supreme Court Custodial Death | Pendency Of Criminal Trial No Bar For Awarding Compensation Under Public Law Remedy: Gauhati High Court Suit For Possession Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act Barred If Filed Beyond Six Months Of Dispossession: Madras High Court Subsequent Purchaser Is Representative Of Judgment Debtor, Separate Suit Challenging Execution Sale Barred Under Section 47 CPC: Kerala High Court Statutory Bail Restrictions Melt Down When Pre-Trial Detention Is Prolonged & Trial Is Unlikely To Conclude Soon: Delhi High Court Failure To Apprise Accused Of Right Under Section 50 NDPS Act Vitiates Search & Recovery: J&K & Ladakh High Court Section 12(5) Arbitration Act Inapplicable To Proceedings Commenced Before 2015 Amendment; Executing Court Can't Apply Neutrality Norms Retrospectively: Punjab & Haryana High Court Banks Can Share Sale Proceeds Of Secured Assets Outside Liquidation Estate With Homebuyers Under Compromise Agreement: Kerala High Court Election Disputes Must Be Resolved Expeditiously; Long Stays Render Adjudication A Mockery Of Justice: Madras High Court Delhi High Court Suspends LOC, Permits Businessman To Travel Abroad For Healthcare Conferences; Cites Roots In Society & Past Compliance Section 138 NI Act Complaint Not Maintainable By Third Party Who Is Neither Payee Nor Holder In Due Course: Allahabad High Court

Jharkhand High Court Sets Aside State Circular on Registrar’s Power to Cancel Sale Deeds: Upholds Civil Court Authority

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Jharkhand High Court has set aside a controversial circular issued by the State Government of Jharkhand. This circular had conferred upon Registrars the power to cancel registered instruments, such as sale deeds, a move that has now been deemed legally unsustainable by the High Court.

The circular in question was aimed at addressing the rising instances of fraudulent registrations. However, the High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Gautam Kumar Choudhary, held that such powers rest exclusively with the civil courts. “The executive power of the State Government under Article 162 is coextensive with the legislative power of the State legislature. But, in the absence of any law, the State or its officers in the exercise of executive authority, cannot infringe citizen’s rights merely because legislature has power to make law on the subject,” the Court observed.

The judgment emphasizes that the cancellation of registered deeds is a significant legal action that cannot be performed by the Registrar post-registration. The Court noted, “There cannot be two views that existing provisions of the Registration Act, do not confer the Registrar with power to cancel a document which has been already registered.”

This landmark decision is expected to have far-reaching implications, particularly in how fraudulent registrations are addressed in the state. The Court also highlighted the potential for multiplicity of proceedings and judicial inefficiency if such powers were to be exercised by the Registrar. “To confer power of cancellation to the Registrar will open floodgates of litigation in such matters,” the judgment stated.

With the annulment of the impugned circular, all related cases, notices, orders passed under it, and consequent orders for the institution of FIRs have been set aside. The decision reasserts the authority of civil courts in matters concerning the cancellation of registered instruments and upholds the legal framework as defined by the Registration Act, 1908. The High Court’s ruling serves as a crucial reminder of the separation of powers and the specific roles of judicial and executive branches in the legal system.

Date of Decision: 11th January 2024                                                            

Vinod Shankar Jha @ Binod Shankar VS State of Jharkhand

 

Latest Legal News