← Library
Madras High CourtWP/13373/2015disposed of

A.Kamalaveni, W/O.Arjunan, v. The Insepctor General Of

2015-04-30Honourable Mr Justice M. Sathyanarayanan3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATE: 30.04.2015

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN W.P.No.13373 of 2015 A.Kamalaveni ... Petitioner

Versus

1. The Inspector General of Registration No.100 Santhome High Road Pattinapakkam Chennai.600 028.

2. The District Registrar North Chennai George Town Chennai.600 001.

3. The Sub-Registrar Madhavaram Sub-Registrar Office Madhavaram Chennai 600 060

4. A.S.M.Balasubramanian

5. Triupurasundari

6. A.R.Murugesh

7. A.R.Shanmugavadivu

8. A.R.Manjula

9. Tmt.R.Thenmozhi

10. K.Kalaiveni

11. A.M.Palani Kumar

12. Mrs.Avayambal

13. D.K.Rangarajan

14. S.D.Amerendran

15. S.D.Karthikeyan

16. S.D.Harikrishna Raj ... Respondents Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a writ of mandamus, directing the 1st to 3rd respondents herein to take appropriate action in accordance with circular No.67 dated 03.11.2011 issued by the 1st Respondent on the fraudulent Partition Deed executed and registered among the 4th respondents to 16th respondents based on the representation of the Petitioner dated 20.02.2015 and 16.04.2015 respectively.

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Karunanithi For Respondents : Mr.R.Vijayakumar (for R1 to R3) Additional Government Pleader.

O R D E R

By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

2. The petitioner submitted a representation dated 20.02.2015 seeking cancellation of alleged fraudulent partition deed dated 09.02.2014, bearing Document No.2333 of 2014, registered by the Office of the Sub Registrar, Madhavaram and her grievance is that, inspite of receipt of the said representation, no orders came to be passed and hence, filed this writ petition.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to Circular No.67 dated 03.11.2011 (C.No.52338/C1/2011) issued by the 1st respondent and would submit that in the light of the mandatory nature of the circular, it is obligatory on the part of the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on the representation.

4. This Court heard the submissions of Mr.R.Vijayakumar, learned Additional Government Pleader, who accepts notice for the respondents 1 to 3.

5. Taking into consideration the limited scope of the prayer sought for by the petitioner and without going into the merits of the application/representation, this Court, directs the 2nd respondent to consider the representations dated 20.02.2015 and 16.04.2015, respectively, submitted by the petitioner, on merits and in accordance with law, after putting on notice the respondents 4 to 16 and pass orders, as expeditiously as possible and not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and inform the decision taken, to the petitioner as well as to the persons concerned.

6. The writ petition is disposed of, accordingly. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

ars To

1. The Inspector General of Registration No.100 Santhome High Road Pattinapakkam Chennai.600 028.

2. The District Registrar North Chennai George Town Chennai.600 001.

3. The Sub-Registrar Madhavaram Sub-Registrar Office Madhavaram Chennai 600 060 +1cc to M/s.J.Karunanithi, Advocate, S.R.No.24339 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.24711 W.P.No.13373 of 2015 RSK(CO) CA(12/05/2015)