Vrinda Reji vs Inspector General Of Registration Department Of Registration. Vanchiyoor. P.O, Thiruvananthapuram, Pin 695035

Gopinath P., J

The petitioner obtained 8.09 Ares of land in Survey No.1100, Block No.15, Re.Sy. No.311/9 of Uliyazhathura Village in Thiruvananthapuram District through Settlement Deed registered as No.2438/2011 at the Sub Registrar's Office, Pothencode. The Settlement Deed was executed by the petitioner's grandmother. The petitioner's grandmother passed away and after her death, the petitioner is in absolute possession and enjoyment of the aforesaid property. The petitioner proposes to sell the property covered by Ext.P1 Settlement Deed. According to the petitioner, this is to meet the marriage expenses of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner makes reference to Ext.P3 invitation card which shows that the marriage of the petitioner is to be solemnized on 9.9.2023.

According to the petitioner, prospective purchasers have refused to enter into any transaction on account of the stipulation in Ext.P1 Settlement Deed that the petitioner will be able to sell the property only after attaining the age of 25 years. Though the petitioner approached the 3rd respondent-Sub Registrar, he issued Ext.P5 communication stating that the clause in Ext.P1 Settlement Deed, is badly on the petitioner. The petitioner's application before the District Registrar was also rejected on the ground that the District Registrar can interfere only if registration is refused by the Sub Registrar.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would refer to Sections 10 and 11 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). It is submitted that under Section 10 of the Act, where property is transferred subject to a condition or limitation absolutely restraining the trasnferee or any person claiming under him from parting with or disposing of his interest in the property, the condition or limitation is void, except in the case of a lease where the condition is provided for the benefit of the lessor or those claiming under him. It is pointed out that, under Section 11 of the Act, where an interest is created in an immovable property but the terms of the deed direct that such interest shall be applied or enjoyed by him in a particular manner, the person in favour of whom the document is executed shall be entitled to receive and dispose of such interest as if there were no such direction. The learned counsel would, therefore, submit that the stipulation in Ext.P1 that the petitioner shall not dispose of the property until she attains the age of 25 is contrary to the provisions of Sections 10 and 11 of the Act and the petitioner was permitted to enter into transactions in respect of that property without being bound by that condition.

The learned Government Pleader on instructions would submit that the petitioner had not presented any document for registration before the 3rd respondent. It is submitted that respondents 2 and 3 have no jurisdiction to declare that any condition in the prior document is null and void. It is submitted that the communications issued by respondents 2 and 3 cannot, therefore, be faulted in law.

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents, I am of the view that the stipulation contained in Ext.P1 Settlement Deed that the petitioner shall not be entitled to dispose of the property covered by Ext.P1 until she attains the age of 25 would be contrary to the provisions of Sections 10 and 11 of the Act. Sections 10 and 11 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 to the extent they are relevant are extracted hereunder:-

“10.Condition restraining alienation.—Where property is transferred subject to a condition or limitation absolutely restraining the transferee or any person claiming under him from parting with or disposing of his interest in the property, the condition or limitation is void, except in the case of a lease where the condition is for the benefit of the lessor or those claiming under him: provided that property may be transferred to or for the benefit of a woman (not being a Hindu, Muhammadan or Buddhist), so that she shall not have power during her marriage to transfer or charge the same or her beneficial interest therein.”

“11. Restriction repugnant to interest created.— Where, on a transfer of property, an interest therein is created absolutely in favour of any person, but the terms of the transfer direct that such interest shall be applied or enjoyed by him in a particular manner, he shall be entitled to receive and dispose of such interest as if there were no such direction.”

It is clear from a reading of Sections 10 and 11 of the Act that, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the stipulation in Ext.P1 Settlement Deed that the petitioner shall not be permitted to transfer the property covered by that deed until she attains the age of 25 cannot be binding on the petitioner. Therefore, this writ petition is allowed and the 3rd respondent is directed to register any document presented in respect of the property covered by Ext.P1 Settlement Deed subject to compliance with usual formalities without in any manner being affected by the fact that Ext.P1 contains a stipulation to the effect that the petitioner will not be entitled to dispose of the property until she attains the age of 25.

The writ petition is allowed in the manner indicated above.