Inclusion of a fictitious property in Kerala in the sale deeds just for the purpose of getting the documents registered in Kerala, is a fraudulent act, therefore, the documents should be held to be void.

Citation

(1998) 1 MLJ 447

-(M. Mohamed Kassim And Ors. vs C. Rajaram And Ors.), 

a Division Bench of this Court had considered the virus of such documents wherein a property at Parasala in Kerala, was also included in the sale deed only to reduce and avail the benefits of lower registration charges and the stamp duty payable on registration. That issue came up for consideration in A.S.Nos.756 and 1177 of 1979 and 82 of 1982. In that judgment in Paragraph 28, the Division Bench held as follows:-

?28. Point No. 4 : One other important objection raised by the learned Counsel for the first respondent/plaintiff is that the impugned sale deeds having not been registered before the Registrar having jurisdiction and on the other hand having been registered in Kerala including a fictitious property are void. It is the admitted case that a property to which the vendors are not entitled has been included in the sale deeds just for the purpose of registering it in Kerala. The reason given by them is that the registration fees in Kerala are cheaper and, therefore, they have chosen to register the case there. It is also in evidence that the vendors under these sale deeds had no sembalance of title to the said property in Kerala and there is also no evidence to show that such properties exist in Kerala. It is a case where the parties had deliberately chosen to register the sale deeds in Kerala, with a view to defeat the provisions of law of this State. There is no difficulty if actually the vendors had any property in Kerala and it is included in the sale deeds, since in such a case the sale deeds can be registered in Kerala and they will be perfectly valid. In this connection, we have to note the relevant provisions in the Registration Act. The sale deeds are compulsorily registrable under Section 17 of the Indian Registration Act of 1877. Section 28 of the Act requires that every registrable document shall be presented for registration in the office of a Sub Registrar within whose sub-district the whole or some portion of the property to which such document relates is situate. Section 49 enacts that no registrable instrument shall affect any immovable property comprised therein unless it has been registered in accordance with the provisions of the Act. Section 65 provides for the transmission of copies to the offices of other districts in which any of the property is situate. Therefore, the registration law is positive that a document should be registered only before the Sub Registrar within whose jurisdiction the property is situate with certain exceptions. It is also seen from the above provisions that a document not registered in accordance with the said provisions of Act has no effect on immovable property comprised therein. In order to show that the sale deeds have been validly registered, there must be evidence to show that the properties of Kerala included in the sale deeds really exist and that the vendors had any semblance of title or right over the same. It is the case of the plaintiff that the inclusion of a fictitious property in Kerala in the sale deeds just for the purpose of getting the documents registered in Kerala, is a fraudulent act, therefore, the documents should be held to be void