← Library
Madras High CourtWP/10006/2024dismissed

R.Ramakrishnan v. The Inspector General Of Registration

2024-04-12Honourable Mr Justice N. Sathish Kumar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 12.04.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR R.Ramakrishnan .. Petitioner

Versus

1.The Inspector General of Registration Office of the Inspector General of Registration No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai - 600 028 2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration Integrated Building Complex Kumaragiri Bypass Road, Near Kailasarovar CBSE School Ammapet, Salem - 636 014 3.The District Registrar (Administration) 1/529, Nerupperichachal Village Pooluvapatti Post Tiruppur - 641 602 4.Meenatchi 5.Indumathi 6.Periyammal 7.Thangavel 8.Manokaran 9.Kandasamy @ Chinnasamy 10.Balakumar .. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of 1/4

the 3rd respondent by Proceedings Na.Ka.6625/A5/2019 dated 28.09.2022 and the order of the 2nd respondent by Proceedings in No.3334/E2/2023 dated 14.11.2023 and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vasavi Sridevi For Respondents : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan for R1 to R3 Special Government Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition is filed challenging the order of the respondent dismissing the application of the petitioner seeking cancellation of the sale deed and partition deed on their file.

2. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. Heard both sides and perused the materials placed on record.

4. Originally, an application has been given by petitioner on the ground that without showing his father has one of the co-owner, the partition deed is registered and subsequently, a sale deed is also registered. Therefore, the document is sought to be cancelled on that ground. Thereafter, it is argued before the authorities as if there was procedural violation, like, ID proofs have 2/4

not been properly verified. Therefore, the documents are sought to be cancelled.

5. The authorities in the impugned order rejected the request of the petitioner and directed the petitioner to agitate his right in the Civil Court. On perusal of the impugned order, I do not find any infirmity, when the registering authorities have no power to cancel the registered document except the documents registered contrary to the Sections 22-A or 22-B of the Act.

6. Such view of the matter, it is for the petitioner to establish his right in a Civil Court when the registering authorities have no power. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

12.04.2024 dhk Index :Yes/No Internet :Yes/No : Yes/No 3/4

N. SATHISH KUMAR , J.

dhk To 1.The Inspector General of Registration Office of the Inspector General of Registration No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai - 600 028 2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration Integrated Building Complex Kumaragiri Bypass Road, Near Kailasarovar CBSE School Ammapet, Salem - 636 014 3.The District Registrar (Administration) 1/529, Nerupperichachal Village Pooluvapatti Post Tiruppur - 641 602 W.P.No.10006 of 2024 12.04.2024 4/4