Topic
The Karnataka High Court ruled that plaintiffs who are not executants of a sale deed are not liable to pay ad valorem court fees under Section 38 of the Karnataka Court Fees Act for seeking a declaration of nullity. This decision reinforces the distinction between cancellation and declaration suits, impacting litigants in property disputes.
Madras High Court reinforces that parties cannot accept benefits under one court order while simultaneously seeking contradictory relief, invoking the 'approbate and reprobate' doctrine. The ruling dismisses a writ appeal attempting to sell plots after securing a prior order for sale deed cancellation and refund, emphasizing finality of judicial orders.
The Madras High Court has struck down Section 77A of the Registration Act as unconstitutional, ruling that registration officers lack jurisdiction to cancel sale deeds - even where possession is disputed. Only civil courts may adjudicate title claims, reinforcing the separation between administrative registration functions and substantive property rights. This empowers corporate debtors and long-term possessors to challenge cancellations through civil litigation, not bureaucratic orders.
The Madras High Court has firmly ruled that Registration Departments lack the legal authority to cancel registered sale deeds, even when fraud is alleged. This clarifies that only a civil court can adjudicate the validity of registered documents, reinforcing the separation between administrative registration functions and judicial remedies in property disputes.