← Library
Madras High CourtWP/10940/2024disposed of

Mr.Rajendran, v. The Sub Registrar,

2024-04-23Honourable Mrs Justice V.Bhavani Subbaroyan4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23.04.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Mr.Rajendran

...Petitioner

Vs The Sub Registrar Sub Registrar Office, Thirukazhukundram

...Respondent

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent to dispose the representation dated 19.03.2024 pending on the file of the respondent in accordance with law and pass orders.

For Petitioner : Mr.M. Jaikumar For Respondents : Mr.P.Ananda Kumar Government Advocate

ORDER

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

1/4

2. This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 19.03.2024.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner obtained the subject property vide settlement deed executed by his father vide Document nos. 2862/2017 and 2863/2017. Likewise the siblings of the petitioner also obtained the property by way of settlement deed. While so, the father of the petitioner had filed a complaint against the petitioner before the Chengalpattu Revenue Divisional Officer under Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act. The petitioner also appeared for the enquiry. Pursuant to which an order was issued to cancel the settlement deed executed to the petitioner by his father. Challenging the same the petitioner filed an appeal in 23.01.2024 and the same is still pending.

The grievance of the petitioner when the appeal is pending the respondent uploaded the cancellation of settlement deed in the registration website, due to which the petitioner's property comes under encumbrance. Hence the petitioner gave a representation to the respondent to consider their case and pass favourable orders. However, the same was not considered. Hence this petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it would be suffice if this Court issues a direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass orders.

5. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent submits that the representation of the petitioner will be considered on merits and in accordance with law.

6. Considering the facts of the case, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case directs the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. This writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.

23.04.2024 Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order smn 3/4

V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J.

smn To The Sub Registrar Sub Registrar Office, Thirukazhukundram W.P.No.10940 of 2024 23.04.2024 4/4