H S Thukral vs Govt Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors.

Court
Delhi High Court

$~20
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 12979/2021 & CM APPL. 35596/2022
Date of Decision : 28.04.2026
IN THE MATTER OF:


H S THUKRAL .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Tanmay Mehta, Mr. Karan S
Thukral, Ms. Vaishnavi Arora, Mr.
Vishal Kumar Malhotra, Mr. Harsh
Chopra, Advs.
versus

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents

Through: Mr. Anubhav Gupta, Panel Counsel
(Civil) / GNCTD, Mr. Siddharth
Arora, Advs.
Ms. Shobhana Takiar with Mr.
Shivam Takiar, Mr. Prateek Dhir, Mr.
Kuljeet Singh, Advs. for DCHFC.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
J U D G E M E N T

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. (ORAL)
1. The petition is for the following reliefs:
I. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ,
order / direction directing the Respondent(s) to release the
registered documents i.e. Sale Agreement and General
Power of Attorney qua the Property bearing no. A-3/27,
Jeevan Jyoti Apartments, Pitampura, Delhi-110034 to the
Petitioner;
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:06.05.2026
18:53:27
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV

II. Grant any such further order or orders as this Hon’ble
Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the present writ petition.

2. The petitioner is an advocate by profession. The respondents are the
governmental authorities.
3. The petition is seeking directions qua registration and subsequent
release of the sale agreement and general power of attorney of property
bearing no. A-3/27, Jeevan Joyti Apartments, Pitam Pura, Delhi -110034
( hereinafter ‘Subject Property’) .
4. The facts of the case would indicate that the petitioner purchased the
subject property jointly with his wife, namely Late Mr. Kawaljeet Kaur. On
14.10.2019 the sale agreement and general power of attorney of the subject
property were executed and presented for registration before the office of
respondent no.3 – Sub Registrar within the stipulated statutory time with
necessary legal procedural formalities.
5. It is the case of the petitioner that, after presenting the documents for
registration, he visited the office of respondent no.3 on 21.10.2019 to collect
the original registered documents, however, no definite information was
furnished. It is further stated that subsequent efforts to ascertain the status of
the documents, were made. However, no action was taken.
6. The sole grievance of the petitioner is that despite complying with all
requirements under the Registration Act, 1908 and despite lapse of
considerable time, the respondents have failed to discharge their statutory
duty of registering and releasing the documents without assigning any valid
reason.
7. The respondent no. 3 – Sub Registrar in their counter affidavit dated
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:06.05.2026
18:53:27
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV

06.09.2023 has taken following position:
“5. It is submitted that the Delhi Co-operative Housing Finance Corp.
Ltd. 3/6, Siri Fort, Institutional area, August Kranti Marg, New Delhi-49,
vide its earlier letter dated 28.07.2009 and subsequent letter has
requested that Jeevan Jyoti Co-operative Group Housing Society Ltd.,
Jiwan Jyoti Apartment, Pitampura, Delhi-34, and some other defaulter
Society, “no action may be permitted in respect of any transaction
concerning sale/purchase/transfer of property etc”, in respect of
defaulter societies situated under the jurisdiction of Sub-Registrar-VI-A
office as intimated recently vide their letter No.F.24(115)/2010-
11/DCHFC/1844 dated 15.02.2021, in continuation their earlier letter
even No. dated 28.07.2009, 01.05.2010, 15.05.2014 and 28.06.2014. The
copies of the abovementioned letters and copies of letter
No.F.24(115)/2009-2010/DCHFC/1637 dated 28.07.2009, &
No.F.24(115)/2009-2010/DCHFC/999 dated 06.09.2009 are annexed
herewith as ANNEXURE P-1 (Colly.).”

“6. That on the request of DCHFC, vide their letters as mentioned above,
the registration of property regarding sale/purchase/transfer has been
stopped as the said societies has failed to repay the loan taken by the
societies and said societies have declared as defaulter societies.”

8. A bare perusal of the aforesaid would indicate that the refusal to
register the documents is founded solely on certain communications issued
by the Delhi Co-operative Housing Finance Corporation Ltd. (DCHFC) ,
whereby a general embargo has been sought to be imposed on transactions
pertaining to certain societies declared as defaulters. However, such
communications, in the absence of any specific statutory backing under the
Registration Act, 1908, cannot override the statutory duties cast upon the
Registering Authority. The stand of the respondents does not disclose any
legally sustainable ground within the framework of the Act to justify non-
registration of the documents, particularly when the procedural requirements
for registration are stated to have been duly complied with by the petitioner.
1
9. The Supreme Court in K. Gopi vs. The Sub-Registrar has

1
2025 INSC 462
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:06.05.2026
18:53:27
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV

categorically held that the role of the Registering Officer under the
Registration Act, 1908 is essentially administrative in nature and does not
extend to adjudication of title. The Registering Authority is neither vested
with the jurisdiction nor empowered to examine the validity of the title of
the executant to the property in question. It has been observed that once the
document is presented in accordance with law, the executants appear before
the authority, admit execution thereof, and all procedural requirements
including payment of requisite stamp duty and registration charges are duly
complied with, the Registering Officer is bound to register the document.
The authority cannot refuse registration on the ground of perceived defect or
absence of title in the executant, as such an exercise falls outside the
statutory mandate of the Registering Authority and lies within the domain of
competent civil Courts. Paragraph no. 15 of the aforesaid decision is
extracted as under:
“15. The registering officer is not concerned with the title held by the
executant. He has no adjudicatory power to decide whether the executant
has any title. Even if an executant executes a sale deed or a lease in
respect of a land in respect of which he has no title, the registering
officer cannot refuse to register the document if all the procedural
compliances are made and the necessary stamp duty as well as
registration charges/fee are paid. We may note here that under the
scheme of the 1908 Act, it is not the function of the Sub-Registrar or
Registering Authority to ascertain whether the vendor has title to the
property which he is seeking to transfer. Once the registering authority is
satisfied that the parties to the document are present before him and the
parties admit execution thereof before him, subject to making procedural
compliances as narrated above, the document must be registered. The
execution and registration of a document have the effect of transferring
only those rights, if any, that the executant possesses. If the executant has
no right, title, or interest in the property, the registered document cannot
effect any transfer.”



Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:06.05.2026
18:53:27
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV

10. The Court, thus, finds that the purported reasons assigned by the Sub
Registrar in counter affidavit may not be sufficient to deny the registration
of the document as presented by the petitioner. The Sub Registrar is,
therefore, directed to consider for registration of documents, keeping in
mind the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of K. Gopi
(supra) , and if the Registrar is of the opinion that for any other reason which
is not covered by the said decision, the registration can still be withheld, he
has to pass an appropriate order.

11. With the aforesaid observations, the instant petition along with
pending application stands disposed of.

(PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV)
JUDGE
APRIL 28, 2026/SH/SS

Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:06.05.2026
18:53:27
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV