Registering Authority Of One State Can’t Insist On Personal Appearance Of Govt. Officer Of Another State Exempted U/S.88 Of Registration Act: Kerala High Court

The High Court was considering a Petition filed by the petitioner seeking a writ of mandamus directing the Sub Registrar not to insist upon the appearance of the Superintending Engineer of Tamilnadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., who was the employer of the petitioner, for registration of a release mortgage in respect of his property.

Referring to Section 88, the Single Bench of Justice P.V. Balakrishnan explained, “A reading of the provision in its entirety would indicate that the exemption is intended to cover officers of the Government, whether of the Union or of the States, including the Administrator-General, Official Trustee, Official Assignee, and also the Sheriff, Receiver, or Registrar of a High Court of different States. Further, as provided under Section 88(1)(d), an officer holding a public office who has been specified in a notification issued by the concerned State Government would also fall within the category of officers exempted from personal appearance before the registering authority.”

"Since the notification in the present case has been issued by the competent Government of the State where the officer concerned is serving, the benefit of the exemption cannot be denied. In other words, if an officer of the Government of Tamil Nadu executes a document in his official capacity and the same is presented for registration in the State of Kerala, the registering authority in Kerala cannot insist upon his personal appearance”, it added.

Factual Background

The petitioner, a permanent resident of Nilambur Taluk in Malappuram District, was employed as a Commercial Inspector in Chennai Division of Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (Tamil Nadu Electricity Board) (TNEB). In order to construct a residential building, the petitioner mortgaged his property in the year 2007. Subsequently, the petitioner also availed another loan for the improvement of his residence. The petitioner thus executed two mortgage deeds before the Sub Registrar, for the said purpose.

Thereafter, the petitioner cleared the entire loan amount, and the creditor acknowledged the same. However, when the petitioner presented the acknowledgement, the Sub Registrar informed the petitioner that the executant of the document, who is the Superintending Engineer of TNEB, is required to be present before him, and the petitioner was also required to pay the stamp duty for registration of the gahan release. It was in such circumstances that the petitioner approached the Court by filing the writ petition.

Arguments

It was the case of the petitioner that the Sub Registrar could not insist on the presence of the Superintending Engineer of TNEB for executing the document pertaining to the release of mortgage/gahan since he is an exempted officer falling under Section 88 of the Registration Act, 1908.

Reasoning

Referring to Section 88(1) of the Registration Act, the Bench explained that this provision exempts a certain category of persons from appearing for registration. Apart from the officers of the Government, the Administrator-General, Receiver, Registrar of a High Court, etc., the holders of public offices as may be specified in a notification in the Official Gazette issued on that behalf by the State Government are also included in the category.

The Bench held, “It is to be borne in mind that the Registration Act, 1908, is a Central legislation having uniform application throughout the country. Consequently, the exemption provided under Section 88 of the said Act operates irrespective of the State in which the document is presented for registration. Therefore, the procedure contemplated under Section 88 cannot be curtailed merely on the ground that the category of persons mentioned therein are stationed in a State different from the one where registration is sought.”

The Bench further noted that an officer who is exempted from personal appearance by virtue of a notification issued by the competent State Government would necessarily fall within the ambit of Section 88(1)(d). Considering that the notification in the instant case was issued by the competent Government of the State where the officer concerned was serving, the Bench held that the registering authority in Kerala could not insist upon his personal appearance.

The Bench thus allowed the writ petition in part by directing the Sub Registrar to act upon the documents as well as the acknowledgement and register the deed of release/gahan within one month.

Cause Title: Alavikutty. T. K v. State Of Kerala (Neutral Citation: 2026:KER:22091)

Appearance

Petitioner: Advocates T.C. Suresh Menon, B. Deepak

Respondent: Government Pleader K.M. Faisal

Click here to read/download Order