Mr.K.V.S.Nagarajan v. The Sub Registrar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 26.02.2015

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL W.A.No.83 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015 K.V.S.Nagarajan .. Appellant/Petitioner Vs.

The Sub Registrar, Sub Registrar's Office, Thiruvallur .. Respondent/Respondent This writ appeal is preferred under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of this court dated 28.04.2011 made in W.P.No.29775 of 2008.

Writ Petition praying to writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to register the sale deed dt.10-6-2004 which was executed by kothanda achari represented by his power of Attorney M.Hemadri in favour of the petitioner and presented to the respondent on the same day i.e. on 10-6-2004 and consequently issue the registered document to the petitoner.

For Appellant : Mr.J.Rjakalifulla, SC for Ms.M.Thenmozhi For Respondent : Mr.N.Sakthivel, GA - - - - -

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI, J.) The instant intra-court appeal arises from the order dated 28.4.2011 passed in W.P.No.29775 of 2008.

2.

The appellant / writ petitioner sought a direction to the respondent to register the sale deed dated 10.6.2004 executed by Kothanda Achari represented by his power of attorney M.Hemadri in favour of the petitioner and presented to the respondent on the same day, i.e., on 10.6.2004 and consequently to issue the registered document to the petitioner.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.

The learned Single Judge, observed that whether the said document should be registered in accordance with the Registration Act is to be decided by the respondent and as such, no positive direction to register the same can be granted. However, a direction was given to the respondent to consider the representation dated 28.11.2008 made by the petitioner for registration of the said document within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt or production of a copy of the order.

4.

The impugned order was passed on 28.4.2011. The appellant is not in a position to state as to what had happened to the direction given by the learned Single Judge, at this stage. However, the view taken by the learned Single Judge is perfectly valid and proper, warranting no interference. Resultantly, the writ appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar Dated:9.3.15 True Copy Sub Assistant Registrar To The Sub Registrar, Sub Registrar's Office, Thiruvallur.

+1 cc to Government Pleader,SR.10796.

mg(co) krd 12/3 W.A.No.83 of 2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/