HIGH COURT ON LEASE STAMP DUTY AND FEE ON REFUNDABLE ADVANCE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAYOF APRIL 2017/22ND CHAITHRA, 1939
WP(C).No. 8300 of 2017 (J)
-----------------------------------------
PETITIONER(S) :
------------------------
SREEDEVI,
AGED 36 YEARS, W/O.KOLAYATTIL SUNIL,
MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, MURIYAD P.O.,-680 683.
BY ADVS. SRI.SAIJO HASSAN
SRI.BENOJ C AUGUSTIN
SRI.RAFEEK. V.K.
SRI.VISHNU BHUVANENDRAN
SRI.U.M.HASSAN
SMT.P.PARVATHY
SMT.S.LEKHA
RESPONDENT(S) :
----------------------------
THE SUB REGISTRAR,
KALLETUMKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 683.
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.R.DEEPA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 12-04-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Msd.
WP(C).No. 8300 of 2017 (J)
----------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED DOCUMENT NO.3122/2005 OF
SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, KALLETUMKARA.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT(2016-17).
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER
FROM THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICE THRISSUR.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE.
Msd.
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C). No. 8300 OF 2017
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of April, 2017
JUDGMENT
Petitioner had sold the property situate in old survey
No. 384/1 of Muriyad Village, Mukundapuram Taluk and
received major portion of the consideration. However, the
document of sale is not accepted for registration on the
reason that the document contains a restriction of
alienation of property for 12 years, which is opposed to the
specific provisions of Transfer of Property Act. According to
the petitioner, no other enactment imposes any such
restriction of alienation. It is also stated that the rigor of
statutory restriction contained under the Land Assignment
Act would not apply in the particular transfer and providing
any aid under the Social Welfare Scheme does not confer a
right on the State to create a clog on the title of the owner
of the property. It is in this background seeking
appropriate direction to the statutory authority, this writ
W.P.(C). No. 8300 OF 2017
- : 2 :-
petition is filed.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Senior Government Pleader and perused the
documents and the pleadings on record.
3. Ext. P1 is the parent title deed and wherein it is
true a restriction is created against transfer of the property
for a period of 12 years. However, the same is an
understanding entered into by and between the respective
parties to Ext. P1 agreement which will not give a right to
the concerned Sub Registrar to object to registration of a
sale deed on account of the Clause contained thereunder.
The issue was considered by a learned Single Judge of this
Court in W.P.(C). No. 3411/2014 dated 17.012.2014 and
held that such restrictions created is nothing but a clog on
the title, which cannot be sustained under law.
4. That being the situation, I am of the considered
opinion that the document allegedly produced by the
petitioner is liable to be registered by the concerned Sub
Registrar. If the petitioner produces any document for
W.P.(C). No. 8300 OF 2017
- : 3 :-
registration and if there are no other legal impediments
standing in the way other than the one discussed above, the
document shall be registered. However if any enquiry is
pending with respect to any transfer of the property, the
same can be continued.
Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
SHAJI P. CHALY
JUDGE
DCS
