IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2010 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1931 RP.No. 196 of 2010(K) --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC.20943/2009 Dated 05/02/2010 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENTS --------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE REGISTRAR, OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SPECIAL SECRETARY, REVENUE AND TAXES DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.T.B.REMANI RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER IN THE WP ------------------------------------------------------------ K.S.MADHAVAN, S/O.K.G.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, KOCHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, IRUMPANAM P.O., KOCHI-9, REP.BY POWR OF ATTORNEY RAMU RAJENDRAN, S/O.RAJENDRAN, HOUSE NO.747 B, 'RAM LAKSHMI' KANNANTHODATH ROAD, EDAPPALLY NORTH, KOCHI - 24. BY ADV.SRI.REJI GEORGE. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P.196/2010 in W.P.(C).20943/2009-K = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 18th day of March, 2010. Order 1.Admitted. 2.Respondent appears through Adv.Reji George. 3.Service complete. 4.Heard finally on consent of parties. 5.The Registrar and the State of Kerala seek review of an interim order passed during the course of a writ petition. The fundamental issue raised in the writ petition relates to the nature and legal incidents of a sale certificate under the SARFAESI Act and as to whether it amounts to a deed requiring payment of surcharge. This is the only issue that is involved in the writ petition. WPC30416/09 -: 2 :- 6.The review petitioners point out different practical difficulties to give effect to the interim order which obliges them to register the document in question provisionally on certain terms which are contained in that interim order. It also tends to make the registration provisional and requires deposit, which could, at a later point of time, be converted to stamps. The learned Government Pleader is right in stating that this may result in lot of administrative inconveniences and it may be worthwhile to consider the final disposal of the writ petition itself rather than insist to obtaining compliance of the interim order as it raises practical difficulties. Having heard the learned counsel for parties, I am satisfied that regard being had to the different provisions of the Registration Act and the Rules, it is appropriate that the interim order is vacated on condition that both the parties be ready to make submissions at the final WPC30416/09 -: 3 :- hearing of the writ petition on 24.3.2010. The interim order sought to be reviewed is, therefore, vacated. The office will list the writ petition on 24.3.2010. The review petition is allowed accordingly. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/1903