R.Jayalakshmi, v. Inspector General Of

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28.11.2022

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.No.37856 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015 R.Jayalakshmi ... petitioner -Vs1. The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome, Chennai-4.

2. The District Registrar, Saidapet, Chennai.

3. The Sub Registrar-I, Registration Office, Saidapet, Chennai.

4. The Tahsildar, Mambalam Taluk, Ashok Nagar, Chennai-83.

... Respondents Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writs of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 27.10.2015 consequently, direct the respondents 2 & 3 to accept the petitioner's cancellation deed dated 26.10.2015 cancelling the settlement deed No,7811/2015 registering on the file of the 3rd respondent. For petitioner : Mr. N.Subramanian For Respondents : Mr. C.Kathiravan, Spl. Govt. Pleader

O R D E R

This petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 27.10.2015 and consequently, direct respondents 2 & 3 to accept the petitioner's cancellation deed dated 26.10.2015, cancelling the settlement deed No.7811/2015 registered on the file of the 3rd respondent.

2. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner died. Till date, the legal heirs of the petitioner are not impleaded in this case. The writ petition has been filed in the year 2015 and considering the pendency of the writ petition, this Court is inclined to dispose of the case.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the deceased petitioner is the mother and she had two children and she has purchased a property in her favour bearing Plot No.7A, New Door No.17, Vinayagar Koil Street, Sastri Nagar, Saidapet West, Chennai-15, measuring an extent of 1200 sq. ft., from one Meera Bai vide document No.336 of 1978. In the year 2015, the petitioner's has agreed to settle the property in favour of her children. But the petitioner's son got her

signature in the settlement deed. Thereafter, the petitioner's son threatened the petitioner and her daughter to vacate the premises. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation to the third respondent to cancel the above settlement deed, but the third respondent has refused to accept the petitioner's cancellation deed. Immediately, the petitioner made a representation to respondents 1 to 3 to stop the mutation in the revenue records in respect of the subject property. However, till date, the respondents have not passed any order on her representation and hence, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition before this Court seeking the above mentioned prayer.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that by using the petitioner's illiteracy and innocence, the petitioner's son misrepresented her mother and got signatures in the typed stamped papers and cheated his mother and sister. In view of the above, the petitioner made a representation to the 4th respondent not to mutate the revenue records in respect of the subject property and also made a representation to the second respondent on 11.11.2016 to cancel the above said settlement deed. The learned counsel further submitted that during pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner died and therefore, he prays that this Court may direct the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation

and pass appropriate orders after hearing the petitioner's daughter, who is the one of the legal heir.

5. Learned Special Government Pleader submitted that this Court may grant liberty to the petitioner's daughter to make a fresh representation before the second respondent seeking cancellation of the settlemnt deed which was produced by her mother.

6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the limited request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court permits the petitioner's daughter, who is the one of the legal heir, to make a fresh representation to the second respondent for cancellation of the settlement deed in respect of the subject property, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon receipt of such representation, the second respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders, after hearing the petitioner's daughter, within a period of twelve weeks, thereafter, under Section 77 A of the Registration Act.

8. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 28.11.2022 rli Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No To

1. The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome, Chennai-4.

2. The District Registrar, Saidapet, Chennai.

3. The Sub Registrar-I, Registration Office, Saidapet, Chennai.

4. The Tahsildar, Mambalam Taluk, Ashok Nagar, Chennai-83.

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

rli W.P.No.37856 of 2015 28.11.2022