R.Manickam v. The Inspector General Of Registration,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 08.04.2026 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE and W.M.P.No.14340 of 2026 R.Manickam ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, R.A.Puram, Chennai - 600 028.

2.The District Registrar, Registration Department, Ammapet, Salem.

3.The Sub Registrar, Sankari Sub-Registrar Office, Sankarai Town, Salem District.

4.Lavanya ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the 3rd respondent from entertaining any document in Survey No.175, subsequently subdivided as 175/1B and 175/1C in Vadugapatti Village, Sankari Taluk, Salem District, based on the petitioner's representation dated 23.03.2026. Page No.1 of 6

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kaithamalai Kumaran For Respondents : Mr.U.Baranidharan Special Government Pleader [R1 to R3] Notice dispensed with [R4] *****

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed to forbear the 3rd respondent from entertaining any document for registration in respect of the property morefully disclosed in the prayer to this writ petition.

2. Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3. Since no adverse order is passed against the 4th respondent in this writ petition, notice to the 4th respondent is dispensed with by this Court.

3. According to the petitioner, he is having the benefit of a civil court decree in respect of the property morefully disclosed in the prayer to this writ petition. Therefore, according to him, the 4th respondent does not have any legal right to register any document pertaining to the property morefully disclosed in the prayer to this writ petition. According to the petitioner, the 4th respondent's husband had already released his entire share in the subject property in favour of the petitioner through a Page No.2 of 6

registered release deed. In view of the same, the petitioner contends that the 4th respondent does not have any legal right over the property morefully disclosed in the prayer to this writ petition.

4. Earlier, the 4th respondent had approach this Court by filing a writ petition in W.P.No.8887 of 2026 challenging the impugned refusal check slip issued by the registration department dated 06.05.2025 refusing to register the sale deed presented by the 4th respondent for registration. The said writ petition also pertains to the very same property, which is the subject of this writ petition. By order, dated 11.03.2026 passed in W.P.No.8887 of 2026, this Court had disposed of the said writ petition by remanding the matter back to the sub registrar for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law. According to the petitioner, there was no direction issued by this Court in the order dated 11.03.2026 passed in W.P.No.

8887 of 2026 for an opportunity of hearing should be granted to the petitioner before registering any document presented by the 4th respondent for registration. Under such circumstances, this writ petition is filed to forbear the 3rd respondent from entertaining any document for registration pertaining to the property morefully disclosed in the prayer to this writ petition. Page No.

5. The interest of the petitioner will be adequately protected if a direction is issued to the 3rd respondent to give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and allow the petitioner to raise all the objections which has been raised in this writ petition and a direction is issued to the 3 rd respondent to consider those objections on merits and in accordance with law, and only thereafter, take a final decision as to whether the sale deed presented by the 4th respondent can be registered or not.

6. No prejudice would be caused to the 4th respondent, if such a direction is issued by this Court.

7. For the foregoing reasons, this Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the petitioner to submit a written explanation to the 3rd respondent as to why the 3rd respondent cannot register the sale deed presented by the 4th respondent for registration pertaining to the property morefully disclosed in the prayer to this writ petition with supporting documents, within a period of one (1) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the said written explanation from the petitoner and only after giving due consideration to the same, the 3rd Page No.4 of 6

respondent shall take a decision as to whether the sale deed presented by the 4th respondent can be registered or not. In case, the 3rd respondent decides to register the sale deed presented by the 4th respondent for registration, the 3rd respondent shall pass a speaking order as to why the objections raised by the petitioner through his written explanation is rejected. No costs.

08.04.2026 Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order sp To 1.The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, R.A.Puram, Chennai - 600 028.

2.The District Registrar, Registration Department, Ammapet, Salem.

3.The Sub Registrar, Sankari Sub-Registrar Office, Sankarai Town, Salem District.

Page No.5 of 6

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

sp 08.04.2026 Page No.6 of 6