Venkatachalam v. The Inspector General Of Registration

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-01-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY Venkatachalam S/o.Mahalingam, No.9/1-9, Kolkaranur village, Mecheri- 636 453, Mettur Taluk, Salem District.

..Petitioner Vs

1. The Inspector General of Registration Registration Department, Santhome, Chennai- 04.

2. The District Registrar Registration Department, Salem West, Salem District.

3. The Sub-Registrar, Mecheri Sub-Registrar Office, Mecheri-636 453, Salem District.

..Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records

of the impugned Refusal Slip dated 16.12.2025 in Refusal No.RFL/ Mecheri /58/ 2025 issued by the 3rd respondent and quash the same, and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to register the settlement deed of the petitioner dated 16.12.2025 in respect of his property in survey No.322/4A (New S.No.4A1A1A1), measuring to an extent of 3281 sq.ft., situated at Mecheri village, Mettur Taluk, Salem District.

For Petitioner:

Mr. M.R.Jothimanian For Respondents:

Mr.U.Baranidharan, Spl. G.P.

ORDER

Asserting ownership over lands in S.No.322/4A of the extent of 3281 sq.ft., the petitioner executed a settlement deed dated 16.12.2025 in favour of his wife and presented the same for registration. The request for registration was declined under the impugned refusal check slip.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a suit for specific performance had been filed by one Duraisamy in O.S.No.62 of 2013. While rejecting the request for specific performance, the petitioner was directed to refund the advance amount of Rs.4,00,000/- under judgment and decree dated 04.04.2018. Citing non-compliance by the petitioner with such decree, learned counsel submits that the registering officer declined registration.

3. Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader, accepts notice for all the respondents. He submits that the matter warrants reconsideration.

4. On perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that the request for registration of the settlement deed was declined solely on the ground that the petitioner had failed to comply with the judgment and decree directing refund of the advance amount of Rs.4,00,000/-. It is not within the domain of the registering officer to decline registration on that ground. Hence, the impugned order is unsustainable and is hereby set aside. As a corollary, the petitioner is permitted to re-present the settlement deed within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Within two weeks therefrom, subject to fulfillment of other requirements relating to registration, the registering officer shall complete registration.

5. The writ petition stands disposed of on the above terms. There will be no order as to costs.

30-01-2026 Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes/No kj

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.

KJ To 1.The Inspector General of Registration Registration Department, Santhome, Chennai- 04.

2.The District Registrar Registration Department, Salem West, Salem District.

3.The Sub-Registrar, Mecheri Sub-Registrar Office, Mecheri-636 453, Salem District.

30-01-2026