UDCPR | Municipal Authorities Empowered To Grant Relaxation For Recreational Open Spaces In Redevelopment Projects: Bombay High Court Appellate Court Can Enhance Compensation Under Motor Vehicles Act Even Without Cross-Appeal By Claimants: Allahabad High Court State Instrumentalities Cannot Supplement Reasons For Withholding Public Money Via Affidavits Years Later: Calcutta High Court Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act | Victim's Status As 'Illegal Immigrant' Does Not Dilute Offence Or Shield Perpetrator: Bombay High Court Clubbing Of Criminal Trials | No Basis To Direct Consolidation If Connected Proceedings Have Already Concluded: Delhi High Court IBC ‘Clean Slate’ Principle Cannot Extinguish Pre-existing Crystallized Liability Under Labour Awards: Bombay High Court Section 406 IPC | 'Donation' Does Not Constitute 'Entrustment'; Criminal Prosecution Quashed In Absence Of Aggrieved Victim: Delhi High Court Failure To Deliver Possession Of Plot Constitutes "Continuous Wrong" Giving Rise To Recurrent Cause Of Action Under Consumer Protection Act: Delhi State Commission High Court Cannot Entertain Writ Petition Under Article 226 When Statutory Appellate Remedy Under Section 107 CGST Act Is Available: Gujarat High Court Appointment Of Temple Servants Is The Exclusive Prerogative Of The Hereditary Trustee: Kerala High Court Stay Of Suit Proceedings Under CPC Does Not Automatically Bar Adjudication Of Pending Temporary Injunction Application: Rajasthan High Court Section 136A MV Act | Supreme Court Directs States To Impound Vehicles With Unpaid E-Challans And Mandates Electronic Enforcement Compliance Section 115 CPC | Executing Court Cannot Dismiss Execution Petition On Hyper-Technical Grounds Regarding LRs Of Judgment Debtor: Himachal Pradesh High Court Succession Act | Will Not Validly Executed If Attesting Witness Admits Signing Without Witnessing Testator’s Signature: Madras High Court High Court Cannot Interfere Under Article 227 To Correct Errors Of Fact Or Act As An Appellate Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court Advocates Act 1961 | Bar Council Has No Power To Suspend Advocate Pending Disciplinary Enquiry: Allahabad High Court Identification Of Accused By Police Personnel In Pitch Darkness Without Prior Acquaintance Is Unreliable: Himachal Pradesh High Court Body Shaming Or Insulting Physical Appearance Does Not Per Se Constitute Offence Under Section 509 IPC: Karnataka High Court Drishyam 3 | Interim Injunction To Restrain Film Release Cannot Be Granted Without Establishing Clear Subsisting Legal Right: Madras High Court Town Planning Scheme | Statutory Notice To Occupiers Under Rule 12(2)(a) Punjab Municipal Rules Is Mandatory And Independent Of Notice To Owner: Punjab & Haryana 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