Hc Impleads Ed, I-t In Case Of Land Registration Denied By Vanur Sub-registrar, ET RealEstate
CHENNAI: Appalled at the manner in which a buyer of 4.4 acres in Tindivanam, Villupuram was made to run from pillar to post to get it registered, with the authorities demanding a bribe of ₹50 lakh, the Madras high court has suo motu impleaded the Enforcement Directorate and the income tax department to unearth the truth.
The registration of the properties was denied by the Vanur sub registrar under Rule 55(A) of the Tamil Nadu Registration Rules, for non-production of previous original sale deed. The high court had declared this rule invalid and unconstitutional.
“The way in which the act of the official respondents in refusing to register the documents is being defended before this court by the government despite the legal position that Rule 55(A)(i) has been declared unconstitutional prima facie further strengthens the doubt entertained by this court over the entire sale transaction,” Justice N Sathishkumar said.
As per a plea of D C Elangovan of Dharmapuri, he bought 1.71 acres from N Naveen Balaji and 2.77 acres from A Manickavel in Tindivanam. He approached the Vanur sub-registrar who refused to register the properties in his name, citing protest petitions by D Ramraj, C K S Karthikeyan, E Velu and Pon Raja who claimed they advanced crores in as loans to the owners and got title deeds as security.
Denying this, Elangovan said the owners lodged a police complaint saying they lost the title deeds. A non-traceable certificate was also obtained from the police.
Refusing to accept this, the sub-registrar conducted an inquiry and recorded that the protest petitioners produced the title deeds which were returned to them after verification.
The petitioner then approached the court which, during hearing, wondered how the protest petitioners produced the same title deeds before the sub-registrar and how the sub registrar overlooked this.
Representing the petitioner, advocate S Elambharathi said the protest petitioners were land brokers hand-in-glove with the registration authorities who were demanding ₹50 lakh as bribe to register the properties. So far, no action has been taken on complaints made against the sub registrar, he added.
Impleading ED, I-T and the protest petitioner as respondents, the court adjourned the hearing to September 26.
