Tmt. Mohana v. The District Registrar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.03.2026 CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE and W.M.P.No.11338 of 2026 Mohana ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Registrar, South Chennai, AC 1 to 48, Todd Hunter Nagar, Fanepet, Nandanam, Chennai - 35.
2.The Sub-Registrar, Sub-Registrar Office, Pallavaram, Chennai District.
3.The Commissioner, TN Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 34.
4.The Tahsildar, Pallavaram Taluk Office, Pallavaram, Chennai.
5.The Special Tahsildar, Town Settlement, Pallavaram, Chennai.
Page No.1 of 6
6.The Executive Officer, Palkeni Vinayagar Thirukoil, Arulmigu Ranganathar Perumal Koil, Thiruneermalai, Chennai 600 132.
... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the order dated 06.01.2021 passed by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.1600/E2/2020, quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Magesh Kumar For Respondents : Mr.U.Baranidharan Special Government Pleader [R1, R2, R4 & R5] Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan Special Government Pleader [R3 & R6] *****
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned order, dated 06.01.2021 passed by the 1st respondent.
2. Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1, 2, 4 and 5 and Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan, learned Special Government Pleader, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 3 and 6.
Page No.2 of 6
3. Under the impugned order, the petitioner has been directed to approach the civil court to redress her grievance with regard to the subject property. She has challenged the impugned order after a lapse of almost 5 years through this writ petition. Neither had the petitioner approached the civil court nor had she challenged the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent immediately after passing of the same. Now, she relies upon the subsequent order passed by the Tahsildar in the year 2025, which according to the petitioner is in her favour. She claims that through the order passed by the Tahsildar in the year 2025, the petitioner's ownership of the property has been confirmed.
When the petitioner has been directed to approach the civil court by the 1st respondent under the impugned order passed in the year 2021 and since the petitioner had not challenged the impugned order immediately after passing of the said order in the year 2021 itself, but has chosen to challenge the same after a lapse of almost 5 years, the question of interfering with the impugned order at this belated stage by this Court does not arise. The petitioner will have to necessarily approach the civil court if the petitioner has to redress her grievance with regard to the subject property.
Page No.3 of 6
4. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is not entertaining this Writ Petition and the same is disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the civil court for the redressal of the petitioner's grievance. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
23.03.2026 Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order sp Page No.4 of 6
To 1.The District Registrar, South Chennai, AC 1 to 48, Todd Hunter Nagar, Fanepet, Nandanam, Chennai - 35.
2.The Sub-Registrar, Sub-Registrar Office, Pallavaram, Chennai District.
3.The Commissioner, TN Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 34.
4.The Tahsildar, Pallavaram Taluk Office, Pallavaram, Chennai.
5.The Special Tahsildar, Town Settlement, Pallavaram, Chennai.
6.The Executive Officer, Palkeni Vinayagar Thirukoil, Arulmigu Ranganathar Perumal Koil, Thiruneermalai, Chennai 600 132.
Page No.5 of 6
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
sp 23.03.2026 Page No.6 of 6