Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Tardeo Properties Private Ltd and another, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the second respondent (Sub-Registrar) to comply with the requisition contained in the Bombay High Court's letters dated 23rd October 2013 and 4th August 2015, and to admit a consent decree for registration as a conveyance of immovable property. The consent decree had been passed by the City Civil Court, Bombay, in a suit between the petitioners and other parties. Despite the court's letters requesting registration, the Sub-Registrar failed to act. The petitioners therefore approached the High Court for a writ of mandamus. The court heard both sides and granted rule, making it returnable forthwith. The court held that a consent decree embodying a compromise regarding transfer of immovable property operates as a conveyance and is compulsorily registrable under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908. The Sub-Registrar is duty-bound to register such a decree when presented, and failure to do so is a dereliction of duty. The court issued a writ of mandamus directing the Sub-Registrar to register the consent decree within a specified time. The judgment was delivered by a division bench of Justices S.C. Dharmadhikari and B.P. Colabawalla on 28th September 2015.
Headnote
A) Registration Act, 1908 - Sections 17 and 89 - Consent Decree as Conveyance - A consent decree embodying a compromise regarding transfer of immovable property operates as a conveyance and is compulsorily registrable under Section 17. The Sub-Registrar is duty-bound to register such a decree when presented, and failure to do so is a dereliction of duty. The court issued a writ of mandamus directing the Sub-Registrar to register the consent decree. (Paras 1-10) B) Constitutional Law - Article 226 - Writ of Mandamus - Where a statutory authority fails to perform a ministerial duty, a writ of mandamus lies to compel performance. The Sub-Registrar's refusal to register a consent decree despite court letters was held to be unjustified, and mandamus was granted. (Paras 3-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a consent decree passed by a civil court can be treated as a conveyance of immovable property and whether the Sub-Registrar is bound to register it under the Registration Act, 1908.
Final Decision
Rule granted and made returnable forthwith. Writ of mandamus issued directing the 2nd Respondent to forthwith comply with the requisition contained in the court's letters dated 23rd October 2013 and 4th August 2015 and admit the consent decree for registration, register the same as a conveyance of immovable property, and complete all formalities within the time prescribed.
Law Points
- Registration Act
- 1908
- Sections 17
- 89
- Code of Civil Procedure
- Order 23 Rule 3
- Consent Decree
- Conveyance
- Mandamus
- Article 226 of Constitution of India
