Sri S. Krishnama Naidu vs The Managing Director and The Special Tahsildar

A.S. Bopanna, J.—The petitioner is before this Court praying that a mandamus be issued to the second respondent to issue a sale certificate typed on a requisite stamp paper to be furnished by the petitioner for the purpose of registration of the sale certificate. The petitioner has also sought for direction to the second respondent to incorporate in the sale certificate the existence of the property in the Commercial Zone in Ward No. 54 of BBMP, Bangalore. In addition, it is also sought that the endorsement at Annexure F dated 02.09.2009 be quashed. The undisputed facts are that the property in question had been auctioned by the respondents to recover the loan which was due to them. The petitioner herein being the successful bidder the sale had been confirmed in his favour. Even as per the case of the petitioner a certificate of sale was executed by the respondents on 07.07.1987 (Annexure-B). The petitioner contends that at that juncture he had been informed that it is optional to get such certificate registered and in that event the petitioner had not obtained the registration of the same. Subsequently since the petitioner finds that it is necessary to have the sale certificate registered, is before this Court seeking for the relief as noticed above.

In that light, when it is the admitted case of the petitioner that a sale certificate had been executed by the respondents on the stamp paper valued at Rs. 16,000/-, at that point, certainly execution of one more document of the similar nature by the respondents would not arise. In that view the endorsement issued would be justified. Having arrived at the said conclusion, what is also to be noticed is that the petitioner is seeking for issue of a similar sale certificate with the intention of having the same registered before the jurisdictional Sub-Registrar. In that regard, as pointed out by the learned Government Advocate, the requirement is as contemplated u/s 89(4) of the Registration Act which provides that in respect of the sale certificate all that is required is to have the same entered in Book No. 1. If that be the position, it would still be open for the petitioner to submit the sale certificate which had already been executed in favour of the petitioner by the respondents to the jurisdictional Sub-Registrar who shall on such presentation, keep in view the provision contained in Section 89(4) of the Registration Act and such other relevant provisions relating to the same and thereafter act in accordance with law. Hence the petitioner is granted the liberty to present the sale certificate to the jurisdictional Sub-Registrar, who shall thereafter act in accordance with law

The petition stands disposed of in the above terms.