This writ petition is filed by an auction purchaser from court sale. The court sale was confirmed in favour the petitioner on 1.10.2013. The sale certificate was issued in favour of the petitioner. It seems that there was some mistake in the sale certificate. The petitioner thereafter approached the Munsiff Court, Pathanamthitta for the correction of the mistake. Accordingly correction was carried out and this was communicated to the Sub Registrar within whose jurisdiction the property is mentioned in Ext.P3 is situated . The Sub Registrar has raised certain doubts regarding registration in terms of Section 419 of Registration Manual. On account of delay in presentation of the sale certificate for registration. According to the Sub Registrar, the sale was held on 1.10.2013 and the sale certificate was initially issued on 30.11.2013. Therefore, the presentation is out of time. The Sub Registrar by Ext.P6 W.P.(C).No. 24732 of 2014 2 requested the District Registrar to pass appropriate orders in the matter of registration. The petitioner approached the District Registrar by Ext.P7. It is on account of of the non-consideration of the Ext.P7, the petitioner has approached this Court. 2. The Sub Registrar appears to be on the impression that presentation of document after four months of issuance of sale certificate cannot be registered without complying the procedure for delay in presentation of the documents. For this reason the Sub Registrar issued Ext.P6 for decision by the District Registrar.
3. The documents produced for registration before the Sub Registrar is different from the sale certificate originally issued by the Civil Court. The original certificate was corrected and corrected sale certificate was forwarded for registration. The correct sale certificate was communicated on 7.8.2014. There is no delay involved in presenting corrected sale certificate for registration. Copies of the sale certificate issued by the Civil Court shall be transmitted to the registering officer or officers, which means the communication from the court is the period to be reckoned for the purpose of registration. In this regard Rule W.P.(C).No. 24732 of 2014 3 346 of Civil Rules of Practice, is extracted herein below.
“Copies of certificates to be sent to registering officers
(1) Copies of sale certificates shall be transmitted to the registering officer or officers within the limits of whose jurisdiction the property comprised in such certificate is situate.
(2) Where a court-sale is set aside, after the transmission of the copy as aforesaid, the Court shall communicate a copy of the said order or if there has been any appeal or revision, the appellate or revisional, order as the case may be, to the registering officer or officers to whom the copy of the sale certificate has been transmitted.”
4. Therefore the sale certificate is corrected by the court, the corrected sale certificate has to be registered and not the original certificate, which has been corrected as per the order of the court. Therefore, for the purpose of registration, the date communication of the corrected sale certificate has to be required. Admittedly there is no delay on presentation of registration of Ext.P3, it has been communicated within time. Therefore, the stand of the Sub Registrar in Ext.P6 is unsustainable. Accordingly there shall be a direction to the Sub Registrar, the 3rd respondent herein to register the sale certificate presented in accordance with law.
Needful shall be done within a period of two weeks from the W.P.(C).No. 24732 of 2014 4 date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/ A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE jm/