← Library
Madras High CourtWP/15414/2026disposed of

T.Sivaram v. The District Registrar

2026-04-20Honourable Mr Justice Abdul Quddhose4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 20-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE and W.M.P.No.16651 of 2026

1. T.Sivaram S/o.Hulasiram

2. R.Jeyalakshmi W/o.R.Govindan represented by their Power Agent V.Ranjithkumar, S/o.Velusamy ..Petitioners Vs

1. The District Registrar, Chennai South, Registration Department, Saidapet, Chennai.

2. The Sub Registrar, Velachery, Chennai.

..Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned refusal check slip in RFL/Velacheri/63/2026 dated 15.04.2026 issued by the second respondent and quash the same as illegal, improper, unreasonable, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and thereby direct the second respondent to register the sale deed dated 15.04.2026 (TP/266310724/2026) presented by the petitioner. For Petitioners :

Mr.B.Gopalakrishnan For Respondents :

Ms.A.Bakkiyalakhmi Government Advocate *****

ORDER

W.M.P.No.16651 of 2026 filed seeking for permission to join together to file a single writ petition is ordered on payment of separate court fee.

2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned refusal check slip dated 15.04.2026 issued by the second respondent refusing to register the sale deed presented by the petitioner for registration on the ground that a protest petition has been filed by a third party opposing registration of any document pertaining to the property, which is the subject matter of the sale deed presented by the petitioner for registration.

3. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the ground that there is no legal impediment for registration of the sale deed presented by the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the protest petition said to have been filed by the third party has already been rejected by the proceedings of the Registration Department. The petitioner has also challenged the impugned order on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice. No opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner by the second respondent before passing the impugned refusal check slip dated 15.04.2026.

4. No prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the matter is remanded back to the respondents for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law after giving due consideration to the contentions of the petitioner raised in this writ petition and after hearing the third party, who has filed the protest petition opposing registration of any document pertaining to the property presented by the petitioner for registration.

5. Being a non-speaking order with regard to the contentions raised in this writ petition and an order passed in violation of principles of natural justice, the impugned order dated 15.04.2026 passed by the second respondent has to be quashed by this Court and the matter has to be remanded back to the second respondent for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law.

6. Accordingly, the impugned refusal check slip dated 15.04.2026 issued by the second respondent is hereby quashed and the matter is remanded back to the second respondent for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law. The petitioner shall submit a written explanation to the second respondent along with supporting documents stating that there is no legal impediment for the second respondent to register the sale deed presented by the petitioner for registration 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 petitioner along with supporting documents within the stipulated time, the second respondent

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

gm shall issue notice to the third party, who has filed the protest petition and after hearing the objections of the said third party and after giving due consideration to the written explanation submitted by the petitioner along with the supporting documents and take a final decision as to whether the sale deed presented by the petitioner can be registered or not within a period of three (3) weeks thereafter. In case, the second respondent decides to refuse registration of the sale deed presented by the petitioner, the second respondent shall pass a speaking order after giving due consideration to the written explanation submitted by the petitioner as well as the supporting documents produced by him. This writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs. 20-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order gm To 1.The District Registrar, Chennai South, Registration Department, Saidapet, Chennai.

2.The Sub Registrar, Velachery, Chennai.