PROJECT ON

PENALTIES UNDER REGISTRATION ACT

SUBMITTED TO:

Mr. SUSHIL JAIN

Assistant Professor

LAND LAW

SUBMITTED BY:

ANIMESH PATHAK

16001106, BA.L.LB VIII Semester

SCHOOL OF LAW

GURU GHASIDAS VISHWAVIDHYALAYA, BILASPUR (C.G.)

  DECLARATION

I hereby, declare that this project is my original piece of work. The project or any part of it is
not being copied from any of the sources without being acknowledged.

I am highly indebted to the authors of the books and the owners of the articles and websites,
from where the reference is being taken. Through the references, I have tried to come-up with
new conceptual interpretation to present the idea of all Pros-n-cons of my subject.

(PENALTIES UNDER REGISTRATION ACT)

ANIMESH PATHAK

ROLL NO. 16001106

B.A. LL.B. VIII semester

  CERTIFICATE

I, ANIMESH PATHAK, 16001106, B.A LL.B. (VIII semester, student of SCHOOL OF

LAW hereby, certifies that I have submitted my project on the subject “PENALTIES
UNDER REGISTRATION ACT”. And this project is being accomplished under the
guidance of my LAND LAW professor, MR. SUSHIL JAIN.

The context of the project is not being copied from anywhere without any such
acknowledgment and is the original work of mine.

ANIMESH PATHAK Faculty Signature:

ROLL NO.16001106

B.A. LL.B. VI semester

  ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I hereby, not just indebted to the authors and owners from whom I referred but also thankful
to my teacher ‘MR. SUSHIL JAIN who actually guided me the way to accomplish my work
on time and made the concept clear to me, so I could tackle with the exceptions and higher
level of theory of the subject. Also, I am glad that God Almighty is always being there by
my side during the duration of the completion of my work and never let me fallen ill, and
thankful to my Parent who always supported me.

ANIMESH PATHAK

ROLL NO.16001106

B.A. LL.B. VI semester

School of law
  SYNOPSIS

1. OBJECTIVE
 Fulfilling the motive of studying the penalties under Registration Act, 1908.

 Understanding and studying the authority of registering officers to act upon

illegal activities related to registration .
2. AIM
To study the penalties, which can be in the form of imprisonment or fine or both
imposed on found guilty of the offence mentioned under S.81 to S.84 of part XIV of
Registration Act, 1908.

3. SCOPE
The present study covers the different forms of forgery related to registration of
documents such as incorrect translation, copying, false personation and abetment etc.
and their specific penalties under Registration Act, 1908.

4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
 Should the penalties of an offence mentioned under the act be more stringent ?
 Should the process of registering documents under Registration Act, 1908 be
simplified to save time and avoid red tapsim?
5. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
For present research work secondary data will be used. Various statistical tools will be
used to analyse the secondary data such as:-

a. Document Review- Obtaining the actual forms and operating documents currently
being used

b. Observation- Analysing annual reports and press release, verifying the statements
made during the interviews

c. Web Search- The information related to outside region will be studied from internet
and other published articles.

6. CHAPTERIZATION
Introduction to study

Penalties under Registration Act,1908

Case laws
  INTRODUCTION

Registration is deemed to prevent fraud. The object of registering a document is to give

notice to the world that such a document has been executed. Registration of a document does
not confer the title over the property as mentioned in the document registered, but provides an
evidence of such transactions being registered, based on which title over the property could
be established. For registration of documents relating to conveyance of properties belonging
to Government, local bodies or religious institutions, “No Objection Certificate” is required
from the relevant authorities concerned. Test of Compulsory Registration: The test for
compulsory registration of a document is the intention of parties as expressed in the
document concerned. What is material for the purpose of compulsory registration of a
document under Section 17(1) of the Registration Act, 1908 is that:

 The document (non-testamentary instrument) must create, assign, declare, extinguish or

limit,

 whether in present or in future,

 any right, title or interest, whether vested or contingent,

 of the value of Rs.100 and upwards, to or in

 Immovable Property.
  PENALTIES UNDER REGISTRATION ACT 1908:-

81. Penalty for incorrectly endorsing, copying, translating or registering documents

with intent to injure.—

Every registering officer appointed under this Act and every person employed in his office
for the purposes of this Act, who, being charged with the endorsing, copying, translating or
registering of any document presented or deposited under its provisions, endorses, copies,
translates or registers such document in a manner which he knows or believes to be incorrect,
intending thereby to cause or knowing it to be likely that he may thereby cause, injury, as
defined in the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), to any person, shall be punishable with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both. State
Amendments Goa: In section 81,—

(a) for the words “or registering of any document”, the words “registering, or filing a true
copy of, any document” shall be substituted;

(b) for the words “or registers such document”, the words “registers or files a true copy of,
such document” shall be substituted. [Vide Goa Act 24 of 1985, sec. 12 (w.e.f. 5-12-1985)].
Karnataka: In section 81,—

(i) in the marginal heading for the words “or registering”, substitute the words “registering or
filing”,

(ii) for the words “or registering of any document”, substitute the words “registering or filing
a true copy of any document”.

(iii) for the words “or registers such document”, substitute the words “registers or files a copy
of such document.” [Vide Karnataka Act 55 of 1976, sec. 15 (w.e.f. 24-10-1976)]. Kerala: In
section 81,—

(a) for the words “or registering of any document”, substitute the words “registering, or filing
a true copy of, such document”;

(b) for the words “or registers such document”, substitute the words “registers, or files a true
copy of, such document”. [Vide Kerala Act 7 of 1968, sec. 15 (w.e.f. 22-2-1968)]. Orissa:
Same as in Kerala. [Vide Orissa Act 14 of 1989, sec. 13 (w.e.f. 19-9-1989)]. Pondicherry: In
section 81,—

(i) in the marginal heading for the words “or registering”, substitute the words “or registering
or filing”;

(ii) in the body of the section, for the words “or registering of any document”, substitute the
words “registering or filing a true copy, of any document”; and

(iii) for the words “or registers such document”, substitute the words “registers, or files a
copy of, such document”. [Vide Pondicherry Act 17 of 1970, sec. 5 (w.e.f. 18-7-1970)].
Tamil Nadu: Same as in Pondicherry above. [Vide Tamil Nadu Act 21 of 1966, sec. 3 (w.e.f.
1-4-1967)]. Tripura: Substitute section 81 as under: “81. Every registering officer appointed
under this Act, and every person employed in his office for the purposes of this Act, who,
being charged with the checking, endorsing, reading, examining, copying, translating,
comparing, pasting a true copy, pasting a copy of the translation or registering of any
document presented or deposited under its provisions checks, endorses, reads, examines,
copies, translates, compares, pastes a true copy, pastes a copy of the translation or registers
such document in a manner which he knows or believes to be incorrect intending thereby to
cause or knowing it to be likely that he may thereby cause injury as defined in the Indian
Penal Code, to any person, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may
extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.” [Vide Tripura Act 7 of 1982, sec. 14 (w.e.f.
1-1-1983)]. West Bengal: In section 81,—

(i) in the marginal note, for the words “or registering”, substitute the words “registering or
filing”,

(ii) for the words “or registering of any document”, substitute the words “registering or filing
a true copy, of any document”, and

(iii) for the words “or registers such documents”, substitute the words “registers or files a
copy of such document”. [Vide West Bengal Act 17 of 1978, sec. 4 (w.e.f. 1-1-1983)].

82. Penalty for making false statements, delivering false copies or translations, false
personation, and abetment.—
Whoever—

(a) intentionally makes any false statement, whether on oath or not, and whether it has been
recorded or not, before any officer acting in execution of this Act, in any proceeding or
enquiry under this Act; or

(b) intentionally delivers to a registering officer, in any proceeding under section 19 or

section 21, a false copy or translation of a document, or a false copy of a map or plan; or

(c) falsely personates another, and in such assumed character presents any document, or
makes any admission or statement, or causes any summons or commission to be issued, or
does any other act in any proceeding or enquiry under this Act; or

(d) abets anything made punishable by this Act, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a
term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both. State Amendments Goa: In
section 82 of the principal Act, for the words and figures “section 19 or section 21”, the
words “this Act or the rules made thereunder” shall be substituted. [Vide Goa Act 24 of 1985,
sec. 13 (w.e.f. 5-12-1985)]. Karnataka: Amendment to section 82(b) is the same as in Kerala.
[Vide Karnataka Act 55 of 1976, sec. 16 (w.e.f. 23-10-1976)]. Kerala: In clause (b) of section
82, for the words “section 19 or section 21”, substitute the words “this Act or the rules made
thereunder”. [Vide Kerala Act 7 of 1968, sec. 16 (w.e.f. 22-2-1968)]. Orissa: Same as in
Kerala. [Vide Orissa Act 14 of 1989, sec. 13 (w.e.f. 19-9-1989)]. Pondicherry: Same as in
Kerala. [Vide Pondicherry Act 17 of 1970, sec. 6 (w.e.f. 1-11-1970)]. Tamil Nadu: Same as
in Kerala. [Vide Tamil Nadu Act 21 of 1966, sec. 4 (w.e.f. 1-4-1967)]. Tripura: Substitute
section 82(b) as under: “(b) intentionally delivers to a registering officer, in any proceeding
under this Act or the rules made thereunder, a false copy or translation of a document, or a
false copy of a map or plan; or”. [Vide Tripura Act 7 of 1982, sec. 15 (w.e.f. 1-1-1983)].
Uttar Pradesh: In section 82, clause (b) was substituted as under: “(b) intentionally delivers to
a registering officer, in any proceeding under section 19 or section 21, a false copy or
translation of a document, or a false copy of a map or plan; or”—Uttar Pradesh Act 14 of
1971, sec. 6 (w.e.f. 25-5-1971). This clause has now been substituted by Uttar Pradesh Act 19
of 1981, sec. 14 (w.r.e.f. 1-8-1981) and the substituted clause is the same as original clause
(b). West Bengal: Same as in Kerala. [Vide West Bengal Act 17 of 1978, sec. 5 (w.e.f. 1-1-
1983)]. Section 82A Karnataka: After section 82, insert as under: “82A. Penalty in respect of
deed-writers.—Whoever contravenes the provisions of section 80B or any term or condition
of a licence granted under rules made under section 69, shall be punishable with
imprisonment which may extend to one month or with fine which may extend to two hundred
rupees or with both.” [Vide Karnataka Act 55 of 1976, sec. 17 (w.e.f. 23-10-1976)]. Madhya
Pradesh:

(Mahakoshal) —In its application to Mahakoshal region of the State of Madhya Pradesh,
after section 82, the following section shall be inserted, namely:— “82A. Penalty for writing
documents without licence.—(1) On and from such date as the State Government may, by
notification, appoint in this behalf, no person shall write a document for another person for
presentation to a registering officer except under a licence granted in accordance with the
rules made under this Act: Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply where the
writer of such document is an authorised agent of the executant or a pleader engaged by the
executant for drawing up the document or the registered clerk of such pleader.

(2) Whoever contravenes the provisions of sub-section (1) shall be punishable with fine
which may extend to two hundred rupees.” [Vide Madhya Pradesh Act 8 of 1955, sec. 2
(w.e.f. 18-4-1955)]. Maharashtra:

(Vidarbha) —Section 82A inserted by the Madhya Pradesh Act 8 of 1955 is repealed in its
application to the Vidarbha region of the State of Maharashtra by Bombay Act 35 of 1958,
sec. 3 (w.e.f. 24-4-1958). Tamil Nadu: After section 82, insert as under: “82A. Penalty.—
Whoever acts as a tout whilst his name is included in a list of touts framed and published
under this Act shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one
month or with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees or with both.” [Vide Tamil
Nadu Act 38 of 1987, sec. 3 (w.e.f. 1-1-1988)]. West Bengal: After section 82, insert the
following new section, namely:— “82A. Penalty.—Whoever acts as a tout whilst his name is
included in a list of touts framed and published under this Act shall be punishable with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine which may extend to
five hundred rupees, or with both.” [Vide Bengal Act 5 of 1942, sec. 10 (w.e.f. 1-11-1943)].

83. Registering officers may commence prosecutions.—

(1) A prosecution for any offence under this Act coming to the knowledge of a registering
officer in his official capacity may be commenced by or with the permission of the Inspector-
General, 67 [***] the Registrar or the Sub-Registrar, in whose territories, district or sub-
district, as the case may be, the offence has been committed.
(2) Offences punishable under this Act shall be triable by any Court or officer exercising
powers not less than those of a Magistrate of the second class. State Amendments Goa,
Daman and Diu: In section 83, for sub-section (1), substitute the following:— “(1) No
prosecution for any offence under this Act shall be commenced save by or with the
permission of the Inspector-General or any officer empowered in this behalf by the
Government.” [Vide Goa Act 2 of 1968, sec. 3]. Tamil Nadu: In section 83, in sub-section
(2), for the word “Offences”, the words, figures and letter “Save as provided in section 80G,
offences” shall be substituted. [Vide Tamil Nadu Act 38 of 1987, sec. 3 (w.e.f. 1-1-1988)].
West Bengal: In sub-section (2), for the word “Offences”, substitute the words, figure and
letter “Save as provided in section 80F, offences”. [Vide Bengal Act 5 of 1942, sec. 11 (w.e.f.
1-11-1943)].

84. Registering officers to be deemed public servants.—

(1) Every registering officer appointed under this Act shall be deemed to be a public servant
within the meaning of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).

(2) Every person shall be legally bound to furnish information to such registering officer
when required by him to do so.

(3) In section 228 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), the words “judicial proceeding”
shall be deemed to include any proceeding under this Act.
 CASE LAWS

1. Suraj Lamps & Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana, AIR 2012 SC 206:

It was held as follows: a. That an immovable property can be legally and lawfully
transferred/ conveyed only by a registered deed of conveyance. b. Transactions in the nature
of ‘General Power of Attorney Sales’ or ‘Sale by Agreement to Sell’ or ‘Transfer by Will’ are
incapable of conveying title and do not amount to transfer, nor can they be recognised as
valid mode of transfer of immovable property. The Courts are not to treat such transactions as
completed or concluded transfers or conveyances as they neither convey title nor create any
interest in an immovable property. They cannot be recognised as deeds conferring title except
to the limited extent of Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Such transactions
cannot be relied upon or made the basis for mutations in Municipal or Revenue Records. c.
This rule applies not only to the deeds of conveyance in regards to freehold property but also
to transfer of leasehold property. A lease can be validly transferred only vide a registered
“Assignment of Lease”. d. An ‘Agreement to Sell/General Power of Attorney/ Will’
transaction neither conveys any title nor creates any interest in an immovable property. e.
Court Held: Observations made by the High Court of Delhi in the case of, Asha M. Jain v.
Canara Bank, 94 (2001) DLT 841, that the concept of ‘Power of Attorney Sales’ has become,
over a period of time, a recognised mode of transfer apropos transactions concluded by way
of Agreement to Sell or General Power of Attorney or Will, are unwarranted, unjustified and
misleading.

2. Hansia v. Bakhtawarmal, AIR 1958:

The question of law that arose for adjudication in this case was this- how far a non-registered
document, which is compulsorily required to be registered under Section 17 of the
Registration Act, 1908, can be used in a proceeding. The document in question in the present
case was a mortgage deed which was not registered, although registration of such documents
is obligatory under Section 17(1) of the Registration Act, 1908. In this case, it was held that,
a suit for redemption based on an un-registered mortgage deed is bound to fall, much because
the purpose of the mortgage deed is to prove the mortgage. The unregistered mortgage deed
can be used only for collateral purposes as provided for in the proviso to Section 49 of the
Registration Act, 1908. The necessary conclusion is this, that, the un-registered mortgage
deed can be used by the plaintiff in a suit for possession (and not in a suit for redemption) to
prove the “nature of possession”, if the defendant denies the claim of the plaintiff on the
ground of adverse possession. Thus, proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908
cannot be relied upon for availing any benefit in a suit for redemption. Collateral purpose
connotes a purpose other than that for creating, assigning, declaring, extinguishing or limiting
a right to an immovable property; documents requiring compulsory registration under the
Registration Act, 1908, can be used for collateral purpose. Note: The property mortgaged is
only a security for the payment of the money lent. The mortgagor is entitled to get back his
property on payment of the principal and interest after the expiry of the due date for the
repayment of the mortgagee's money. This right of the mortgagor is called the Right of
Redemption. Note: The term “collateral transaction” is used not in the sense of an ancillary
transaction to a principal transaction or a subsidiary transaction to a main transaction. The
root meaning of the word “collateral” is running together or running on parallel lines. The
transaction as recorded would be a particular or specific transaction. But it would be possible
to read in that transaction what may be called the purpose of the transaction and what may be
called a collateral purpose, the fulfilment of that collateral purpose would bring into existence
a collateral transaction, a transaction which may be said to be a part and parcel of the
transaction but none the less a transaction which runs together with or on parallel lines with
the same.

3. Tek Bahadur Bhujil v. Debi Singh Bhujil, AIR 1966 SC 292:

In this case, it was held that, where a family arrangement was brought about by a document
in writing with the purpose of using that writing as a proof of what the family had arranged
for, then such a document would require compulsory registration because it is then that such a
document would amount to a document of title declaring for future, what rights/claims and
what properties the parties i.e. each member of the family would possess or enjoy.

4. Ghulam Ahmad v. Ghulam Qadir, AIR 1968

In this case, it was held that, when the agreement is purely mutual and a family one for the
enjoyment of property without limiting or extinguishing the right of anybody, then it may not
be registered. It was held that, after examining, whether or not, a document is compulsorily
registrable under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908, comes the stage of examining the
document and seeing whether it could be admitted to registration in view of Section 21 of the
1908 Act, once is it found that the document is to be compulsorily registered. Thus, the test
is, if the document is hit by any of the provisions of Section 17 of the 1908 Act, the
application or non-application of Section 21 of the 1908 Act does not at all arise for
consideration, because it is the second-step in the chain of steps which completes the
registration formality. A document which comes within the terms of Section 17(1) (b) of the
1908 Act is compulsorily registrable; whatever is saved from the operation of this clause (that
is, clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the 1908 Act) of the Section is not
compulsorily registrable. Document is any substance having any matter expressed or
described upon it by marks capable of being read. As per the law for time being in force in
India, it is the matter written and not the substance on which the matter is expressed or
described which is said to be a document. Meaning of the words- creating, declaring, limiting
and extinguishing:  The word “create” in legal terminology means to bring into being, to
invest with a new title, or to produce. Therefore, every non-testamentary instrument which
means to, or has the effect of originating some right, title or interest in immovable property
will be governed by the word “create”.  The word “declare” is equivalent to “define” or
“authoritatively set forth”; a mere recital of fact does not tantamount to a declaration.  The
word “limit” connotes restriction of some right or interest in immovable property.  The
word “extinguish” is a counter-part of the word “create”, for it means “to bring to an end” or
to “quench” some right, title or interest in immovable property. A non-testamentary
instrument which varies the right or interest made by an earlier instrument, has as much the
effect of creating some new right or extinguishing an old one as an absolutely fresh document
would do- such a document also requires registration. A compromise is a settlement of
disputed claim and applies to demands of all sorts. Where it merely contains a recital of a
previous agreement, it does not require registration, but where the compromise itself declares
a right to immovable property then it operates as a contract and requires registration.
5. Ram Sewak Jaiswal v. Abdul Majeed, AIR 1980 :I

In this case it was held as follows: i. In case of an agricultural lease, a registered kabuliyat
coupled with acceptance of the same by the landlord is sufficient to constitute a lease in the
eyes of law. ii. A rent-note or kabuliyat is executed unilaterally by the lessee alone, by which,
the lessee agrees to take some immovable property on lease from the lessor. A rent-note or
kabuliyat comes within the definition of the term ‘lease’ for the purposes of Section 2(7) of
the Registration Act, 1908, though it cannot be termed as ‘lease’ sensu stricto for the
purposes of Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, however, it shall require
compulsory registration if it is executed for a period stated in Section 17(1) (d) of the
Registration Act, 1908. iii. A rent-note or kabuliyat is inadmissible in evidence if it is not
registered, though it requires compulsory registration under Section 17(1) of the Registration
Act, 1908. iv. Note: The period for which the house was taken according to the terms of the
rent-note was for 11 months and the rent reserved was Rs. 5/- per month, it was held that, no
compulsory registration was required as regards Section 17(1) (d) of the Registration Act,
1908, although the above arrangement shall constitute a lease within the mischief of Section
2(7) of the Registration Act, 1908. Thus, no registration was required, neither within the
mandate of Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908, nor within the mandate of any of the
provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, as the lease was for a period which was less
than one-year. (Note: Section 2(7) of the Registration Act, 1908: “lease” includes a
counterpart, Kabuliyat, as undertaking to cultivate or occupy, and an agreement to lease)
 CONCLUSION

For every offense there are defined penalty either in form of imprisonment or fine or both.
Registration Act, 1908 same as other acts also provides for various offences and their
penalties in regard to the registration of documents by authorities and presiding officers.
The penalties are a core part of any act as it regulates the process under which the documents
are to be registered.

Therefore, we have discussed in an extensive manner with the help of case laws mentioned
above the offences and penalties mentioned in the Registration Act, 1908 which deals with
registration of documents.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314424567_The_Registration_Act_1908_Critical_Analysi
s_of_the_1908_Act

https://indiankanoon.org/search/?formInput=registration%20act%20sec.82