A.Saraswathi v. Inspector General Of Registration

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 12.06.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR A.Saraswathi .. Petitioner

Versus

1.The Inspector General of Registration Santhome Road, Mylapore Chennai - 600 004 2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration Registration Department Cuddalore - 607 001 3.The District Registrar (Administration) Office of the District Registrar Chidambaram - 608 001 4.The Sub Registrar Chidambaram - 608 001 5.N.Senthilkumar 6.M/s.Cholamandalam Investment & Finance Co.Ltd Dare House First Floor, No.2, N.S.C.Bose Road Chennai - 600 001 .. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3rd respondent to take appropriate action as per the directions issued by the 2nd respondent by his proceedings dated 06.11.2023.

1/4

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Muthukumar For Respondents : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan for R1 to R4 Special Government Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition is filed directing the 3rd respondent to take appropriate action as per the directions issued by the 2nd respondent by proceedings dated 06.11.2023.

2. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that she is the tenant under the fifth respondent. While so, the 5th respondent while executing the memorandum in favour of the Finance Company has forged a letter said to have been given by the petitioner as if she has no objection. The letter addressed to the registering authorities at the relevant point of time is forged one. Therefore, the petitioner seeks action.

3. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

4. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. Since, no adverse order is passed against the private respondents, notice to them is dispensed with. 2/4

5. At the outset, this Court is of the view that if really, the signature of the petitioner is forged one, the petitioner is confident, there is no bar to prosecute the 5th respondent for the alleged forgery. Therefore, mere direction to the registering authorities will not serve any purpose. It is open to the petitioner to take appropriate criminal action for the alleged forgery in the manner known to law.

6. With the above, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. 12.06.2024 dhk Index :Yes/No : Yes/No To 1.The Inspector General of Registration Santhome Road, Mylapore Chennai - 600 004 2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration Registration Department Cuddalore - 607 001 3.The District Registrar (Administration) Office of the District Registrar Chidambaram - 608 001 4.The Sub Registrar Chidambaram - 608 001 3/4

N. SATHISH KUMAR , J.

dhk W.P.No.14981 of 2024 12.06.2024 4/4