Whether Sub Registrar can cancel registration of registered document?

The role of the Sub-Registrar (Registration) stands discharged, once the document is registered (see Raja Mohammad Amir Ahmad Khan (supra). Section 17 of the Act of 1908 deals with documents which require compulsory registration. Extinguishment Deed is one such document referred to in Section 17(1)(b). Section 18 of the same Act deals with documents, registration whereof is optional. Section 20 of the Act deals with documents containing interlineations, blanks, erasures or alterations. Section 21 provides for description of property and maps or plans and Section 22 deals with the description of houses and land by reference to Government maps and surveys. There is no express provision in the Act of 1908 which empowers the Registrar to recall such registration. The fact whether the document was properly presented for registration cannot be reopened by the Registrar after its registration. The power to cancel the registration is a substantive matter. In absence of any express provision in that behalf, it is not open to assume that the Sub-Registrar (Registration) would be competent to cancel the registration of the documents in question. Similarly, the power of the Inspector General is limited to do superintendence of registration offices and make Rules in that behalf. Even the Inspector General has no power to cancel the registration of any document which has already been registered.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 6673 of 2014

Decided On: 26.10.2016

 Satya Pal Anand
Vs.
State of M.P. and Ors.

Coram:Ranjan Gogoi, Prafulla C. Pant and A.M. Khanwilkar, JJ.

Citation:(2016) 10 SCC767

Print Page

Whether co-operative society can unilaterally cancel sale deed by executing extinguishment Deed?

For the reasons
stated supra, I have to grant the reliefs in
favour of the appellant as prayed by him and
quash the extinguishment deed dated
09.08.2001 along with the subsequent sale
deeds registered in favour of the respondent
No.5 who in turn has sold property in favour
of respondent Nos.6 and 7 without the
authority of law. The sale deed can be
cancelled under Section 31 of the Specific
Relief Act, 1963, by the competent civil
court if the same is challenged within the
period of limitation stipulated under Article
59 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Since the
facts are undisputed in the case on hand and
the respondent Society, after the lapse of 39
years has erroneously and illegally cancelled

the absolute sale deed registered in favour
of the appellant’s mother, the appellant has
acquired a valid and absolute title to the
property in question and the same could not
have been cancelled by the respondent Society
and the Sub-Registrar as it is void ab initio
in law. Hence, the High Court should have
responsibly exercised its extraordinary
jurisdiction and should have examined the
documents of the sale deed with respect to
the relevant provisions of the M.P
Co-operative Societies Act and Rules, 1962
and the Bye-laws of the Society. The
cancellation of the sale deed executed in
favour of the appellant’s mother in the year
1962 by way of the extinguishment deed could
not have been registered by the Sub-Registrar
as he is not empowered to do so. Hence, for
want of the competent jurisdiction, in
registering such document, the High Court
should have exercised its extraordinary
jurisdiction to annul the extinguishment deed

and the transactions of the subsequent sale
deeds, which has not been done by it.
Reportable
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6673 OF 2014
Satya Pal Anand 
Versus
State of M.P. and Others .
Dated:August 25, 2015.
Dipak Misra, J.

Print Page