C.Rajasekar v. The Inspector General Of Registration

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

1. C.Rajasekar S/o.Chinnaraj, No.20, Patchaiamman Kovil Stret, Sirukaverypakkam, Kancheepuram District-631502 Petitioner Vs

1. The Inspector General Of Registration 100, Santhome High Road, Chennai-600 028.

2.The Joint-1 Sub Registrar The Office Of Sub Registrar, Kancheepuram District.

3.The Deputy Superintendent Of Police Economics Offence Wing, Ashok Nagar, Chennai-600 083.

Respondent(s) Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent vide RFL/Joint-I, Sub Registrar, Kancheepuram/3/2025 dated 27.01.2025 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and non-est in law and 1/4

consequently direct the 2nd respondent to register and release the sale deed dated 27.01.2025 within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Santosh For Respondents : Mr.U.Baranidharan, Special Government Pleader [R1 & R2] Mr.V.J.Priyadarsana Government Advocate [Crl.side] [R3] *****

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed challenging the refusal check slip issued by the second respondent dated 27.01.2025 and for a consequential direction to the second respondent to register the sale deed dated 27.01.2025 and to release the same.

2. Heard Mr.S.Santosh, learned counsel for petitioner, Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.V.J.Priyadarsana, learned Government Advocate [Crl.side] appearing for third respondent.

3. The reason assigned by the second respondent in the refusal check slip is that a communication was received from the third respondent to the effect that the sale deed must not be entertained pertaining to the subject property. Accordingly, the second respondent 2/4

refused to register the sale deed by acting upon the said communication. In the considered view of this Court, the issue involved in the present case is covered by the earlier order passed in the case of R.Madhupriya and another v. Inspector General of Registration and another [2020 SCC OnLine Mad 20112]. This Court has held that a mere communication from the police cannot stop the Sub-Registrar from registering the document.

4. In view of the above, the impugned refusal check slip issued by the second respondent dated 27.01.2025 is hereby quashed. There shall be a direction to the second respondent to register the sale deed, if it is otherwise in order.

This writ petition is allowed with the above direction. No costs. 25.03.2025 Index: Yes/no Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order gm N.ANAND VENKATESH, J gm 3/4

To

1. The Inspector General Of Registration 100, Santhome High Road, Chennai-600 028.

2.The Joint-1 Sub Registrar The Office Of Sub Registrar, Kancheepuram District.

3.The Deputy Superintendent Of Police Economics Offence Wing, Ashok Nagar, Chennai-600 083.

25.03.2025 4/4