- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Delhi HC Refuses To Pass Directions in a Plea Seeking E-Registration of All Property Documents: Says Rome Was Not Built In A Day
The Delhi High Court refused to pass directions in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking e-registration of all property documents, wills, deeds at the Sub-Registrar office in NCT of Delhi and granted liberty to the petitioner to make a representation before an appropriate authority.The Division Bench of the Delhi High Court was hearing a PIL filed by one DC Tuteja and noted that the...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
The Delhi High Court refused to pass directions in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking e-registration of all property documents, wills, deeds at the Sub-Registrar office in NCT of Delhi and granted liberty to the petitioner to make a representation before an appropriate authority.
The Division Bench of the Delhi High Court was hearing a PIL filed by one DC Tuteja and noted that the present issue involves a policy decision and Courts cannot interfere in such affairs.
“Physical presence of the parties can always be done virtually by making the Sub-Registrar equipped with the virtual portals which would allow the parties to be virtually present before the Sub-Registrar and save the time, money, energy and also the spread of COVID. The said Practise would also reduce the footfall at the Sub-Registrar's office which can become the breeding ground for spread of COVID-19 or any other such disease in future”, the petition stated.
Moreover, the petitioner contended that the submission of secret documents can still be allowed to be done through physical presence. The petition also argues that the Sub-Registrar office can become a single window transaction issue where the documents can be collected and deposited-
“Documents which are uploaded on the System would itself be proof enough of the execution of the same by the parties and verification of the person executed can be done at the time the parties present themselves virtually before the Sub-Registrar.”
Petitioner’s counsel Advocate Gaurav Bahl submitted that the Delhi Government was only three steps away from making the registration process for property, will, deeds etc. completely online.
In response, the bench comprising of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan said-
“How can the Court decide all this? If they are ready to do it, fine. Apart from that there is nothing more that we can do. Rome was not built in a day. You may want to implement a good idea but that requires infrastructure and many other changes. Yes with time, these ideas can be incorporated by the Government.”
Finally, the Court disposed of the said petition noting that the representation to be made by the petitioner may be considered by the Delhi government and decided accordingly.