REG 094 Territorial Jurisdiction and Competence of the Registering Officer — Law of Registration Notes for Judiciary

Territorial Jurisdiction and Competence of the Registering Officer: Where He May Act, Whether He May Act, and What Section 87 Saves

Two different objections are made to a registration, and they are often confused. Territorial jurisdiction asks whether this was the right office: Sections 28 to 31 fix the office by the situation of the property, or, for documents falling under Section 18, by Section 30. Competence asks whether this officer could lawfully do this act at all: whether the power belonged to a Registrar rather than a Sub Registrar, and whether the conditions the Act attaches to the act, such as presentation by a person authorised by Section 32, were satisfied. Section 87 saves neither. It cures a defect in the officer's appointment or in his procedure, and the word it turns on is "merely".

The two objections, their sources, and the limits of the saving in Section 87

1. Territorial Jurisdiction

Sections 28 to 30, Registration Act, 1908, in substance

28. Place for registering documents relating to land. Save as in this Part otherwise provided, every document mentioned in section 17, sub section (1) clauses (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e), section 17 sub section (2) insofar as it relates to immovable property, and section 18 clauses (a), (b), (c) and (cc), 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.

29. Place for registering other documents. Every document not being a document referred to in section 28 or a copy of a decree or order, may be presented for registration either in the office of the Sub Registrar in whose sub district the document was executed, or in the office of any other Sub Registrar under the State Government at which all the persons executing and claiming under the document desire the same to be registered.

30(1). Registration by Registrars in certain cases. Any Registrar may in his discretion receive and register any document which might be registered by any Sub Registrar subordinate to him.

For documents relating to immovable property, the office is fixed by the property. Any office within whose sub district the whole or some portion of the property is situate will serve.
Section 65 deals with the property lying in more than one sub district, and Section 66 with property in more than one district, by the transmission of copies and memoranda.
For other documents, Section 29 gives a choice, either the office where the document was executed or any other office the parties agree on.
Section 30 is a concurrent power in the Registrar, to receive and register anything his Sub Registrars could register.
Section 31 is not a departure from jurisdiction but from place. On special cause being shown, the officer may attend at a private residence within his own limits.
A refusal on this ground alone needs no order. Sections 71 and 76 except it, because the officer has nothing before him that he can deal with.

2. Competence

It begins with the office. Sections 3 to 7 provide for the Inspector General, for districts and sub districts, for Registrars and Sub Registrars, and for the offices in which they sit.
Some powers belong to the Registrar alone. The enquiry under Section 74 where execution is denied, the appeal under Section 72, the order directing registration under Section 75, and the deposit of wills under Sections 42 to 46 are all his.
Some acts are conditional on the Act's requirements being met. Presentation must be by a person authorised by Section 32; an agent must hold a power authenticated under Section 33; the executants must appear under Sections 34 and 35.
A defect in any of these is not a matter of procedure. It goes to whether the officer had anything before him that he was empowered to register.
Presentation by a person not competent under Section 32 is the leading instance. It has long been treated as a want of jurisdiction, and Section 87 does not cure it.
Registering an unstamped instrument is a distinct defect. Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 forbids an instrument not duly stamped from being registered at all.

3. Section 87

Section 87, Registration Act, 1908

87. Nothing so done invalidated by defect in appointment or procedure. Nothing done in good faith pursuant to this Act or any Act hereby repealed, by any registering officer, shall be deemed invalid merely by reason of any defect in his appointment or procedure.

Three conditions. The act must have been done in good faith, pursuant to the Act, and by a registering officer.
Two defects are saved, and only two: a defect in his appointment, and a defect in his procedure.
The word "merely" does the work. The section saves the act from being invalidated merely on that ground; it does not save an act which is bad on some other ground as well.
A want of jurisdiction is neither of the two. An officer who had no authority over the property, or no power to do the act, did not follow a defective procedure; he did something he was not empowered to do.
So a registration outside the territorial limits is a nullity, and the document is treated as unregistered with all that Section 49 entails.
But a defective endorsement, an irregularity in the order of steps, or an error in the form of a memorandum, is procedure, and is saved if done in good faith.

4. The Two Compared

	Territorial jurisdiction	Competence
The question	Is this the right office for this document	Is this officer lawfully in a position to do this act
The provisions	Sections 28 to 31, with Sections 65 and 66 where the property spans more than one office	Sections 3 to 7 on offices and appointments; Sections 32 and 33 on presentation; Sections 34 and 35 on appearance
The test	The situation of the property; for Section 18 documents, Section 29 or the parties' choice	The source and scope of the officer's authority, and the conditions the Act attaches to the act
A typical defect	A sale deed of land in one district presented in another	A Sub Registrar entertaining what only the Registrar may entertain; presentation by a person not authorised by Section 32
Is refusal on this ground recorded	No. Sections 71 and 76 except this ground from the requirement of an order	Yes. Any other refusal is recorded under Section 71 or Section 76
Is it cured by Section 87	No. Section 87 saves a defect in appointment or procedure, not a want of jurisdiction	A defect in appointment is saved if the act was done in good faith; an act beyond his powers is not
The consequence	The registration is a nullity, and the document is treated as unregistered	The same, where the officer acted wholly beyond his powers
How it is raised	As a plea in the civil suit in which the document is relied on	The same
What it is not	A matter of convenience for the parties	A mere irregularity in the steps followed

5. Sorting the Defects

The defect	Its character	Cured by Section 87
The property lies wholly outside the officer's sub district	Want of territorial jurisdiction	No
The document was presented by a person not authorised by Section 32	Want of jurisdiction	No
The agent's power of attorney was registered but never authenticated under Section 33	Want of jurisdiction	No
A Sub Registrar decided what Section 74 gives to the Registrar	Want of competence	No
The officer's appointment was irregularly made	Defect in appointment	Yes, if the act was done in good faith
An endorsement under Section 58 was made out of order or imperfectly	Defect in procedure	Yes, if done in good faith
The memorandum under Section 64 or 65 was sent late or in the wrong form	Defect in procedure	Yes, if done in good faith
The instrument was insufficiently stamped when registered	A breach of Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899	No. Section 87 does not touch the Stamp Act

6. Why the Distinction Is Worth Keeping

⚠ Section 87 is a saving clause, not a general cure

The temptation, when a registration is attacked, is to read Section 87 as a broad provision that saves anything done in good faith. It is not. Its language is narrow and deliberate: "invalid merely by reason of any defect in his appointment or procedure". The purpose is to protect completed transactions from being upset by discoveries about how an officer came to hold his post, or about the order in which he did the things the Act required of him. It was never meant to confer jurisdiction where the Act gave none. If it did, Sections 28 to 30 would have no force at all, since every registration in the wrong office could be defended as a procedural slip made in good faith. The scheme only works if a want of jurisdiction stands outside the saving, and that is how it has been read.

7. The Common Errors

Supposing that Section 87 cures a registration in the wrong office. It does not; that is a want of jurisdiction.
Supposing that a defect in presentation under Section 32 is an irregularity. It is a want of jurisdiction.
Supposing that registering a power of attorney makes the agent competent to present. Section 32(c) requires the power to be authenticated under Section 33, which is a different act.
Supposing that the officer must refuse and record reasons where the property is outside his limits. Sections 71 and 76 except that ground.
Supposing that the parties may agree on any office for a deed of immovable property. Section 28 fixes the office by the property; the choice in Section 29 is for other documents.
Supposing that Section 30 lets a Sub Registrar do a Registrar's work. It runs the other way: a Registrar may do what his Sub Registrars could do.
Supposing that Section 87 has anything to say about stamp duty. It does not touch the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.

8. The Position Stated Shortly

1. Territorial jurisdiction asks whether this was the right office; competence asks whether this officer could lawfully do the act.

2. Sections 28 to 31 fix the office, by the situation of the property for documents relating to immovable property, and by Section 29 or the parties' choice for others.

3. Section 30 gives a Registrar a concurrent power to register anything his Sub Registrars could register.

4. Refusal on the ground that the property lies outside the officer's limits needs no order of refusal, Sections 71 and 76 excepting it.

5. Competence turns on the source of the officer's authority under Sections 3 to 7, and on the conditions the Act attaches to the act.

6. Presentation by a person not authorised by Section 32, or by an agent whose power was not authenticated under Section 33, is a want of jurisdiction.

7. Section 87 saves an act done in good faith from being invalid merely by reason of a defect in the officer's appointment or procedure.

8. It does not save a want of jurisdiction, and the word "merely" is what confines it.

9. A registration made without jurisdiction is a nullity, and the document is treated as unregistered with all that Section 49 entails.

10. Section 87 does not touch the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, under which an instrument not duly stamped may not be registered at all.