BENGALURU
In a move aimed at reducing avoidable litigation and streamlining property record updates, the High Court has issued clear guidelines directing civil and commercial courts, as well as Sub-Registrars, to ensure time-bound action when registered property documents are declared void or cancelled.
Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum, in a recent order, stated that whenever a court annuls or cancels a registered document related to immovable property, a copy of the decree must be sent to the jurisdictional Sub-Registrar within four weeks. The communication should include key details such as document number, date of registration, book and volume, and the nature of the document cancelled.
The court further directed that such decrees must be accompanied by a covering letter requesting the Sub-Registrar to update the relevant registers and indexes. Upon receiving the communication, the Sub-Registrar is required to complete the necessary entries within four weeks.
Importantly, the court clarified that even if no formal communication is received, Sub-Registrars cannot refuse action if a party submits a certified copy of the judgment and decree. In such cases, the authority must verify the authenticity of the document and proceed to update records accordingly.
Justice Magadum emphasised that the role of the Sub-Registrar in such matters is purely ministerial and does not involve examining the validity of the court’s decree. Authorities were also instructed not to insist on additional orders from higher courts once a competent civil court has issued its ruling.
The directions came in response to a petition filed by K. Antony Samy, who alleged that despite a special court annulling certain property-related documents, the Sub-Registrar in Mahadevapura failed to reflect the cancellation in the encumbrance certificate, citing lack of official communication.
The judge noted that such lapses force litigants to approach higher courts unnecessarily, increasing the burden on the judiciary. He observed that timely compliance by courts and registering authorities would prevent repetitive litigation and save valuable judicial time.
The High Court stressed that strict adherence to these guidelines would ensure transparency in property records and reduce disputes arising from outdated or incorrect entries in official documents across the state.
