Madras High CourtWP/5766/2026disposed of

V.Krishnan v. The Sub Registrar

2026-02-26Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY V.Krishnan .. Petitioner vs The Sub Registrar, Veppanapalli, Krishnagiri District.

.. Respondent Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the entire records relating to the impugned refusal check slip in RFL/Veppanapalli/104/2025 dated 26.09.2025 on the file of the respondent, quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to register the settlement deed dated 25.07.2025 within a stipulated period of time as fixed by this Court. For Petitioner :

Mr.R.Ezhilarasan For Respondent :

Mr.U.Baranidharan, Special Government Pleader

ORDER

Tracing title from his grandfather Rame Gounder, the petitioner states that certain properties owned by his grandfather 1/4

were allotted to him under oral partition. Intending to settle the property in favour of his sons, he executed a settlement deed and presented the same for registration. Such request was declined under the impugned refusal check slip.

2. Adverting to the legal heir certificate dated 26.02.2018 in respect of Rame Gounder, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all the legal heirs are alive. Therefore, he submits that the registering officer should have issued notice to the legal heirs instead of rejecting the request for registration.

3. Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader, accepts notice for the sole respondent. He points out that the request for registration was declined in view of the large number of legal heirs and the absence of a registered partition deed.

4. Considering the fact that the petitioner claims to have inherited the property of his grandfather, including by way of oral partition by and between the family members, it is necessary to issue notice to the legal heirs in order to ascertain the right of the petitioner to execute the settlement deed. In order to enable such re-consideration, the impugned refusal check slip is liable to be and is hereby set aside.

2/4

5. Consequently, the petitioner is permitted to re-present the settlement deed for registration. Within thirty days from such representation, subject to fulfillment of other requirements relating to registration, the registering officer shall either register the document or issue a speaking order of refusal under Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908.

6. This writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs.

26.02.2026 Index:Yes/No mmi To The Sub Registrar, Veppanapalli, Krishnagiri District.

3/4

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J.

mmi 26.02.2026 4/4