The Madras High Court has ruled that Section 77-A of the Registration Act, 1908, introduced through a State amendment in 2022, is unconstitutional. This section gave District Registrars excessive power to cancel property documents in cases of alleged fraud or forgery.

Key Findings

Justices S.S. Sundar and N. Senthilkumar expressed concerns that while Section 77-A might protect honest landowners, it could also harm innocent property owners.

The judges noted that existing Sections 22-A and 22-B already allow officials to refuse document registration under certain conditions. Typically, property title disputes are handled by civil courts, which ensure fairness and due process.

Judicial vs. Executive Authority

The court highlighted that District Registrars lack the qualifications of judges, raising concerns about bias and fairness in resolving property disputes since Registrars operate within the government.

Purpose of the Registration Act

The primary goal of the Registration Act is to maintain accurate public records of property transactions. The court emphasized that registering a document does not resolve underlying property title issues, which require thorough legal scrutiny. Section 77-A allowed District Registrars to annul registrations, but these annulments could be challenged in civil courts, limiting the section’s practical effectiveness.

Note on Section 77-A (Indian Income Tax Act)

Section 77-A of the Indian Income Tax Act, introduced in 2015, allows taxpayers to correct errors in their tax returns within a year without penalties, aiming to address genuine mistakes rather than intentional tax evasion. This provision imposes limitations based on the nature and timing of the error correction.