Post-injunction registration of deeds executed prior to the order does not constitute willful contempt.

The petitioner filed a suit and an application for interim relief regarding certain properties.

On 30th July 2024, the respondents’ counsel undertook not to transfer the suit property until the following day.

On 31st July 2024, the Court restrained respondent no. 1 from alienating or creating third-party interests in the properties until 8th September 2024.

On 5th August 2024, the petitioner discovered that three gift deeds regarding the properties had been registered on 1st August 2024 and completed on 2nd August 2024.

The petitioner alleged this constituted a willful violation of the Court’s orders.

The respondents contended that the deeds were executed, presented for registration, admitted, and the stamp duty was paid on 18th July 2024—prior to the Court’s orders.

They argued that the subsequent dates in August were merely administrative acts by the Registrar.

1. Whether the respondents willfully and deliberately violated the Court’s orders dated 30th July 2024 and 31st July 2024 by the registration of gift deeds in August 2024.

The Court considered Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, regarding the necessity of registered instruments for transferring immovable property.

It primarily applied the procedures under the Registration Act, 1908, specifically Section 32 (presentation), Section 34 (appearance), Section 35 (admission of execution), and Section 60 (certificate of registration), alongside the West Bengal Registration Rules, 1962 (Rules 43 and 69).

The Court noted that under these provisions, once execution is admitted and formalities are met, the issuance of the registration certificate is an administrative duty of the Registrar.

The Court examined the specific timeline of the registration process versus the timing of its injunctions.

It found that although the "date of registration" was listed as 1st August 2024 and "completion" as 2nd August 2024, the material acts of the respondents—execution of the deeds, admission before the Registering Authority, payment of stamp duty, and providing fingerprints—were all completed on 18th July 2024.

These acts occurred nearly two weeks before the undertaking of 30th July and the injunction of 31st July.

The Court reasoned that the respondents had no role in the subsequent issuance of the Certificate of Admissibility and Certificate of Registration by the District Sub-Registrar.

Consequently, the legal transfer process was effectively set in motion and the parties' obligations were fulfilled before the Court's restrictive orders existed.

The contempt application (C.C. No. 80 of 2024) was dismissed, the interim order was vacated, and the rule issued against the alleged contemnors was discharged.