Mrs.Sarasammal v. The Inspector General Of

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 25.10.2017

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN W.P.No.13597 of 2017 & W.M.P.No.14744 of 2017 1.Mrs.Sarasammal 2.Baby [ Petitioners ] Vs

1. The Inspector General of Registration Santhome, Chennai- 600 008

2. The District Registrar Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District 3.The Joint Registrar-I Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District 4.Muniraj [Respondents] Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioners' representation dated 26.05.2016 which has been given to cancel the fraudulent sale deed No.2861 of 2016 dated 17.10.2016 on the file of the 3rd respondent based on the direction of the 1st respondent in Letter No.54382/U3/2016 dated 02.12.2016 and by virtue of circular No.67 dated 03.11.2011 of the 1st respondent within the time frame that may be fixed by this Court.

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Arokia Maniraj For Respondents : Mr.R.Vijayakumar, AGP for R1 to R3 Mr.C.K.A.Appaji for R4

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by A.SELVAM, J.] This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the second respondent to look into the representation dated 26.05.2016, alleged to have been given by the petitioners in respect of a fraudulent document dated 17.10.2016 in view of the Circular No.67 dated 03.11.2011, by way of issuing a writ of mandamus. 2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has advanced his arguments on the basis of averments made in the petition.

3.The learned Additional Government Pleader has submitted the Circular dated 20.10.2017, issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu, wherein, it has been clearly stated that Circular No.67 dated 03.11.2011 has already been withdrawn.

4.The main relief sought in the writ petition is to direct the second respondent to consider the representation dated 26.05.2016.

5.Considering the fact that the representation alleged to have been given by the petitioners is pending on the file of the second respondent, this Court is inclined to pass the following order.

6. In fine, the writ petition is allowed in-part without costs. The second respondent is directed to look into the representation dated 26.05.2016 and dispose of the same as early as possible after giving opportunity to the persons concerned. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

-sd/- Assistant Registrar / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar gpa

To

1. The Inspector General of Registration Santhome, Chennai- 600 008

2. The District Registrar Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District 3.The Joint Registrar-I Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District 1 cc to MR.S.AROKIA MANIRAJ Advocate SR.NO. 75980 W.P.No.13597 of 2017& W.M.P.No.14744 of 2017 RD 20/11/2017