IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2008 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 4393 of 2008(W) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SADANANDHAN, S/O.APPU @ CHATHU EZHUTHASSAN, PALLISSERY HOUSE, MUNDOOR, PAZHAMUKKU DESOM, ANJOOR VILLAGE, (PO) MUNDOOR, TRICHUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.MOHANAN(PALAKKAD). RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT REGISTRAR (GENERAL), DISTRICT REGISTRAR OFFICE, THRISSUR. 3. SUB REGISTRAR, SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, MUNDOOR, P.O. MUNDOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. M.R. SABU. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.4393/2008-W: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE WILL DTD. 18/02/2005 EXECUTED BY APPU @ CHATHU EZHUTHASSAN IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE SALE DEED DTD. 04/12/2007 EXECUTED BY PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF SAKKIR HUSSAIN. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 04/12/2007 ISSUED BY R.3. S.R.O, MUNDUR. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DTD. 11/01/08 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR (GENERAL), THRISSUR. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE R.2. DTD. 23/01/2008. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) 4393 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated: MARCH 17, 2008 JUDGMENT In this writ petition, the prayer sought for by the petitioner is to quash Exts.P3 and P5. Petitioner also seeks a direction to the 3rd respondent to receive Ext.P2 and register the same. 2. It would appear that the petitioner presented Ext.P2 document for registration. Petitioner derived the title to the property covered by Ext.P2 under a Will. The Will is an unregistered document. In is on account of this, the 3rd respondent issued Ext.P3 requiring the petitioner to have the Will authenticated by a court of law for registering Ext.P2. Petitioner moved the 2nd respondent by filing Ext.P4 and the 2nd respondent issued Ext.P5 declining the prayer sought for. It is in this background that the writ petition has been filed. 3. There is no law requiring compulsory registration of the Will and, if that be so, there is absolutely no justification for respondents 2 and 3 in taking the stand evidenced by Exts.P3 and WP(C) 4393/08 Page numbers P5. Petitioner is also fortified in his submission in view of the law laid down by this court in Eshaque v. Sub Registrar - 2002 (1) KLT 330. 4. Therefore, Exts.P3 and P5 will stand quashed and the 3rd respondent is directed to receive Ext.P2 document, if it is otherwise validly executed, and register the same in accordance with law. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/-