*”Landmark Verdict: Madras HC Rules Sub Registrar Not Obligated to Verify Document Authenticity”*In a recent legal development, the Madras High Court, Madurai Bench, in the case of M.Suriya Prabha v. State & Anr (04.03.2024), delivered a notable judgment. The court, led by Justice R. Hemalatha, addressed the intricacies of Section 52 of the Registration Act, 1908, clarifying that registering officers, including Sub Registrars, are not legally obligated to verify property titles or document authenticity during the registration process.The background of the case involved allegations of criminal conspiracy related to property registration. M. Suriya Prabha, a Sub Registrar, was accused of conspiring in the registration of a fraudulent settlement deed. The charges against him were framed under IPC sections 420, 423, 465, 468, 471 read with 120(b).The court’s meticulous analysis highlighted that the Registration Act does not impose a duty on registering officers to verify property titles or ownership during registration. Their role is primarily to ensure proper stamp duty and registration charges for the presented documents.Justice Hemalatha underscored the absence of specific allegations or substantive evidence against M. Suriya Prabha regarding his involvement in any conspiracy to fabricate documents. This led to the conclusion that the final report filed against him was unsustainable.In light of these considerations, the High Court quashed the final report against M. Suriya Prabha in C.C.No.435 of 2019. This decision, grounded in the legal perspective on the duties of Sub Registrars and the lack of evidence against the petitioner, sets a precedent in clarifying the scope of responsibilities during property registration.
