IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 28601 of 2011(A) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SUBAIDA P.P, D/O.P.P.MOHAMMED HAJI PAZHAYA PUTHANVEETIL HOUSE, P.O.VETTOM, TIRUR TALUK,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- THE SUB REGISTRAR SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, TIRUR-676 101. BY GOV.T PLEADER SRI. MOHAMMED SHAH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/11/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).NO.28601/2011-A: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1:- THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PASSPORT OF DECEASED P.P.MOHAMMED DATED 22/4/2000. EXT.P2:- THE TRUE COPY OF THE STATUTORY DECLARATION MADE BY YOUSMAN BIN MOHD BADAR IS PRODUCED HEREWITH. EXT.P3:- THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY YOUSMAN BIN MOHD BADAR TO THE CONSULATE GENERAL OF MALASIA AT CHENNAI DTD. 6/3/09. EXT.P4:- THE TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DTD.4/3/2009 IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER AND OTHERS. EXT.P5:- THE TRUE COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER AND HER SISTERS DATED 15/10/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).28601/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 15th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT According to the petitioner, she submitted Ext.P5 partition deed for registration. It is her case that the partition deed was executed on the strength of Ext.P4 power of attorney executed in Malaysia. It is submitted that, on presentation of the documents along with the power of attorney, respondent declined to register the document on the ground that the power of attorney is not a registered one. It is contended that in view of the provisions of Section 33(c) of the Registration Act, 1908, the power of attorney should have been accepted when the documents are registered. 2. However, the learned Government Pleader obtained instructions and submitted that the document was not presented for registration. Though the averments in the writ petition are that the document was presented for registration and that the Registrar refused to act upon the same, nothing has been placed on record to prove the assertion made by the petitioner in this behalf. W.P.(C).28601/11 2 3. In the light of the submission now made by the learned Government Pleader which contradicts the claim of the petitioner, I direct that it will be open to the petitioner to produce Exts.P4 and P5 for registration and on the receipt of the same, the respondent will accept the document and consider the same for registration and if the document is not registered for any reason, he will pass an order to that effect and communicate the same to the petitioner. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs /true copy/ P.A. To Judge