Victim Has Locus To Request Court To Summon Witnesses Under Section 311 CrPC In State Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Order 2 Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Ground to Reject a Plaint: Supreme Court Draws Crucial Distinction Between Bar to Sue and Bar by Law No Right to Lawyer Before Advisory Board in Preventive Detention — Unless Government Appears Through Legal Practitioner: Supreme Court Wife's Dowry Statement Cannot Be Used to Prosecute Her for 'Giving' Dowry: Supreme Court Upholds Section 7(3) Shield Husband's Loan Repayments Cannot Reduce Wife's Maintenance: Supreme Court Raises Amount to ₹25,000 From ₹15,000 Prisoners Don't Surrender Their Rights at the Prison Gate: Supreme Court Issues Binding SOP to End Delays in Legal Aid Appeals A Judgment Must Be a Self-Contained Document Even When Defendant Never Appears: Supreme Court on Ex Parte Decrees Court Cannot Dismiss Ex Parte Suit on Unpleaded, Unframed Issue: Supreme Court Sets Aside Specific Performance Decree Denied on Title Erroneous High Court Observations Cannot Be Used to Stake Property Claims: Supreme Court Steps In to Prevent Misuse of Judicial Observations No Criminal Proceedings Would Have Been Initiated Had Financial Settlement Succeeded: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail In Rape Case Directors Cannot Escape Pollution Law Prosecution by Claiming Ignorance: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Summons Against Company Directors Order 7 Rule 11 CPC | Court Cannot Peek Into Defence While Rejecting Plaint: Delhi High Court Death 3½ Months After Accident Doesn't Break Causal Link If Doctors Testify Injuries Could Cause Death: Andhra Pradesh High Court LLB Intern Posed as Supreme Court Advocate, Used Fake Bar Council Card and Police Station Seals to Defraud Victims of Rs. 80 Lakhs: Gujarat High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail Husband Who Travels to Wife's City on Leave, Cohabits With Her, Then Claims She 'Never Lived With Him' Cannot Prove Cruelty: Jharkhand High Court Liquor Licence Is a State Privilege, Not a Citizen's Right — No Vested Right of Renewal Survives a Change in Rules: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Stay on E-Auction Policy Court Holiday Cannot Save Prosecution From Default Bail: MP High Court No Search At Your Premises, No Incriminating Document, No Case: Rajasthan HC Quashes Rs. 18 Crore Tax Assessment Under Section 153C Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K 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