T.Azhagamuthu v. The Inspector General Of Registration

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15-04-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

1. T.Azhagamuthu S/o. Thangavel, Door No. 3/2 South Street, Porasakurichi, Kallakurichi Taluk, Kallakurichi district Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Inspector General of Registration 100 Santhome High Road, Mullima Nagar, Mandavelipakkam, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai 28 2.The district Registrar Office of The district Registrar , Salem district, 3.The Sub Registrar Gangavalli SRO Salem district Respondent(s) PRAYER Calling for the records relating to the impugned check slip issued by the 3rd respondent dated 18.08.2025 vide RFL/ Gangavalli/ 30/ 2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondent to register the document presented by the petitioner within a time frame to be fixed by this court For Petitioner(s):

Mr.A.Rajakumar For Respondent(s):

M/s.A.Bakkiyalakshmi Govt.Advocate For Respondent

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed, challenging the impugned refusal check slip dated 18.08.2025 issued by the third respondent, refusing to register the sale deed presented by the petitioner for registration on the following grounds: a) A protest petition has been filed by a "Temple", opposing registration of any document pertaining to the property, which is the subject matter of the sale deed presented by the petitioner for registration; b) The impugned refusal check slip dated 18.08.2025 is a non speaking order with regard to the contentions of the petitioner; c) The impugned order has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice as the petitioner was not afforded any opportunity of hearing prior to the passing of the impugned refusal check slip dated 18.08.2025.

2. The petitioner categorically contends before this Court that his vendor was the absolute owner of the property. He has also filed supporting documents in support of his contentions. This Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the same.

3. Ms. A. Bakkiyalakshmi, learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. She has placed on record the written instructions received by her from the Registration Department, stating that a protest petition has been filed by a "Temple", opposing registration of any document by any

third party involving the property, which is the subject matter of the sale deed presented by the petitioner for registration.

4. As seen from the impugned refusal check slip dated 18.08.2025, the petitioner's contentions as raised in this writ petition along with the petitioner's supporting documents have not been considered by the third respondent. The petitioner was also not afforded any opportunity of hearing by the third respondent prior to passing of the impugned refusal check slip dated 18.08.2025.

5. Since the impugned refusal check slip dated 18.08.2025 is a nonspeaking order and is an order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, necessarily, the impugned refusal check slip dated 18.08.2025 has to be quashed and the matter has to be remanded back to the third respondent for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law.

6. Accordingly, the impugned refusal check slip dated 18.08.2025 issued by the third respondent is hereby quashed and the matter is remanded back to the third respondent for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law. The petitioner shall submit a written explanation to the third respondent along with supporting documents, stating as to why there is no legal impediment for the third respondent to register the sale deed presented by the

petitioner for registration within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the same, within the stipulated time, the third respondent shall issue notice to the rival claimant viz., the "Temple", which has filed a protest petition and after hearing the objections of the said Temple and after giving due consideration to the written explanation submitted by the petitioner and the supporting documents produced by the petitioner, shall take a final decision as to whether the sale deed can be registered or not within a period of four weeks thereafter.

7. In case, the third respondent decides to refuse registration of the sale deed presented by the petitioner, the third respondent shall pass a speaking order, after giving due consideration to the contentions of the petitioner as raised in this writ petition as well as the supporting documents produced by the petitioner.

8. With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No Costs.

15-04-2026 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes ab

To 1.The Inspector General of Registration 100 Santhome High Road, Mullima Nagar, Mandavelipakkam, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai 28 2.The district Registrar Office of The district Registrar , Salem district, 3.The Sub Registrar Gangavalli SRO Salem district

ABDUL QUDDHOSE J.

ab 15-04-2026