Madras High CourtWP/12366/2026disposed of

Mrs.Mohana v. The Sub-Registrar

2026-03-30Honourable Mr Justice Abdul Quddhose6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE and WMP No. 13514 OF 2026, WP No. 12370 OF 2026

1. Mrs.Mohana

2. Jagatheeshwari

3. Vanjitha ..Petitioner(s) Vs The Sub-Registrar Dharmapuri (West) Salai Vinayagar Kovil Road Dharmapuri 636701.

..Respondent(s) WP No. 12370 of 2026

1. Mrs.Mohana

2. Jagatheeshwari

3. Vanjitha ..Petitioner(s) Vs The Sub-registrar Dharmapuri (West) Salai Vinayagar Kovil Road Dharmapuri 636701.

..Respondent(s) Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the entire records pertaining to the issuance of the impugned Refusal Order no. RFL/Dharmapuri West/138/2025 dated 24.11.2025 passed by the respondent

herein and quash the same consequently direct him / her to register the sale deeds presented by the petitioners pertaining to the lands at Survey No.425/2C1B to an extent of 33 1/2 cents and Survey No. 506/2K2 to an extent of 6 1/2 cents at Palayam Village, Nallampalli Taluk, Dharmapuri District within a stipulated time.

WP No. 12370 of 2026 Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the entire records pertaining to the issuance of the impugned Refusal Order no. RFL/Dharmapuri West/139/2025 dated 24.11.2025 passed by the respondent herein and quash the same consequently direct him / her to register the sale deeds presented by the petitioners pertaining to the lands at Survey No.586/4 to an extent of 74 cents at Palayam Village, Nallampalli Taluk, Dharmapuri District within a stipulated time.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.C.Umashankar For Respondent(s):

Mr.U.Baranidharan, SGP COMMON ORDER These writ petitions have been filed challenging the impugned orders dated 24.11.2025 refusing to register the sale deeds for registration on the ground that the sale deeds had already been registered for the very same property in favour of one Thangamani.

2. The petitioners categorically contend before this Court that they have a legal right to present the sale deed for registration. According to them, without authority under law, the petitioners' father had executed the sale deed in favour of one Thangamani. According to them, they had filed a civil suit seeking declaration of title, and in the said suit, the Civil Court had declared the sale deed executed by their father in favour of one Thangamani as null and void. In view of the same, the petitioners have now become absolute owners of the subject properties and therefore, they are legally entitled to execute the sale deed and present it for registration.

However, according to them, erroneously, by total non-application of mind, the respondent had refused to register the documents by arbitrarily stating that the petitioners' father had already executed the sale deed in favour of one Thangamani for the very same property. The petitioners have also challenged the impugned refusal check slip on the ground that it has been issued in violation of the principles of natural justice, as the petitioners were not afforded any hearing prior to the passing of the impugned refusal check slip.

3. Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

4. As seen from the impugned orders, the petitioners were not afforded of any opportunity of hearing prior to the passing of the impugned orders. Neither

the petitioners' contentions nor the supporting documents produced by them were considered in the impugned orders. Being a non-speaking order with regard to the petitioners' contentions and the supporting documents produced by them, and an order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned orders dated 24.11.2025 passed by the respondent have to be quashed and the matter remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law.

5. Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of in the following manner:- (a) The impugned orders dated 24.11.2025 are quashed by this Court and the matter is remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law.

(b) The petitioners shall submit a written explanation to the respondent as to why the respondent has to accept the registration of the sale deed presented by the petitioners for registration, along with supporting documents, within a period of one week form the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

explanation submitted by the petitioners along with supporting documents, shall take a final decision with regard to registration of the sale deeds presented by the petitioners, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks thereafter.

(d) If the respondent decides to refuse to register the sale deeds, the respondent shall pass a speaking order, after giving due consideration to the contentions of the petitioners and the supporting documents produced by them.

No Costs. W.M.P.Nos.13514 and 13517 of 2026 are ordered subject to payment of separate court fee.

30-03-2026 RKM To The Sub-registrar Dharmapuri (West) Salai Vinayagar Kovil Road Dharmapuri 636701.

ABDUL QUDDHOSE J.

RKM AND WMP NO. 13514 OF 2026,WP NO. 12370 OF 2026 30-03-2026