Poongodi v. The Inspector General Of Registration
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.03.2026 CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE Poongodi ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome High Road, Annamalai Puram, Chennai - 600 028.
2.The District Registrar, The District Registrar office, Tiruppur.
3.The Sub Registrar, The Sub-Registration Office, Nambiyur.
4.Solochana ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records of Refusal check slip number RFL/Nambiyur/25/2025 dated 14.11.2025 on the file of 3rd respondent and quash the same, consequently direct the 3rd respondent to registrar sale deed dated 14.11.2025.
Page No.1 of 6
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Sudhakar For Respondents : Mr.U.Baranidharan Special Government Pleader [R1 to R3] Notice dispensed with [R4] *****
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned refusal check slip, dated 14.11.2025 issued by the 3rd respondent, refusing to register the sale deed presented by the petitioner's vendor for registration on the ground that the will produced by the petitioner's vendor is an unregistered will.
2. Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3. Since no adverse order is passed against the 4th respondent in this writ petition, notice to the 4th respondent is dispensed with by this Court.
3. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice and on the ground that the impugned order is a non-speaking order issued without jurisdiction. The reason given by the 3rd respondent for refusing to Page No.2 of 6
register the sale deed presented by the petitioner's vendor for registration is incorrect, since for a property situated at Tiruppur District, there is no requirement for the will to be registered. Since there are two beneficiaries in the will though for different extents of property, this Court deems it fit to direct the 3rd respondent to issue notice to the 4th respondent, who is the other beneficiary by way of abundant caution. The petitioner categorically contends before this Court that under the will, the petitioner alone is entitled to the property disclosed in the sale deed, which has been presented for registration.
Since the reason given by the 3rd respondent for refusing to register the sale deed presented by the petitioner's vendor for registration, namely non-registration of will is incorrect, necessarily, the impugned refusal check slip has to be quashed. Since no opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner's vendor prior to the passing of the impugned refusal check slip dated 14.11.2025, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned refusal check slip has been issued in violation of the principles of natural justice.
4. It is also noticed from the impugned refusal check slip, dated 14.11.2025 that it is a non-speaking order. Being a non-speaking order and an order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, this Page No.3 of 6
Court deems is fit to remand the matter back to the 3rd respondent for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance wit law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
5. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned refusal check slip, dated 14.11.2025 issued by the 3rd respondent is hereby quashed and the matter is remanded back to the 3rd respondent for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. The vendor of the sale deed in which the petitioner is a purchaser shall re-present the sale deed with the 3rd respondent, within a period of one (1) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
On receipt of the same within the stipulated time, the 3rd respondent, shall issue notice to both the petitioner's vendor as well as the 4th respondent, the other beneficiary under the will and conduct an enquiry and after hearing the respective contentions and after giving due consideration to the supporting documents filed by them, shall take a final decision as to whether the sale deed presented by the petitioner's vendor can be registered or not. The aforesaid exercise is directed to be completed by the 3rd respondent, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date when the petitioner's vendor has re-presented the sale deed for registration. Page No.
6. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
04.03.2026 Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order sp To 1.The Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome High Road, Annamalai Puram, Chennai - 600 028.
2.The District Registrar, The District Registrar office, Tiruppur.
3.The Sub Registrar, The Sub-Registration Office, Nambiyur.
Page No.5 of 6
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
sp 04.03.2026 Page No.6 of 6