Subramani v. The District Registrar,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY Subramani ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The District Registrar, Ranipet District, Ranipet, Tamilnadu-632 401.

2. The Tahsildhar Sholingar Taluk, Ranipet District.

3. Palani ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to conduct an enquiry on the petitioner complaint dated 04.03.2023 as to cancel the forged, fabricated settlement deed Doc.No.309 of 2019 registered at Sub Registrar Office, Sholingur, and cancel the patta No.1872 issued in the name of the 3rd respondent in respect of the petitioner's land Survey No.200/B2B at Aayal Village, Sholingur Taluk, Ranipet district and restore the same in the petitioner's name.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.P.R.Thiruneelakandan For Respondent(s):

Mr.P.Harish, GA for R1 & 2 Mr.N.Nagu Sah for R3

ORDER

This writ petition is filed to direct the 1st respondent to conduct an enquiry on the petitioner complaint dated 04.03.2023 as to cancel the forged,

fabricated settlement deed Doc.No.309 of 2019 registered at Sub Registrar Office, Sholingur, and cancel the patta No.1872 issued in the name of the 3rd respondent in respect of the petitioner's land Survey No.200/B2B at Aayal Village, Sholingur Taluk, Ranipet district and restore the same in the petitioner's name.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the land to an extent of 20 cents in S.No.200/B2B at Aayal Village, Sholingar Taluk, Ranipet District belongs to petitioner. However, the third respondent has created a forged and fabricated deed, as if the said property belonged to his father, who settled the same in favour of him in the year 2019. Based on the same, the patta in respect of petitioner's land was mutated in the name of the third respondent. After knowing the said facts, the petitioner has approached the respondents 1 and 2 to cancel the forged settlement deed and patta issued in the name of the third respondent. However, no action was taken. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.

3. The learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 and 2 would submit that once a settlement deed is registered, it remains valid and binding. Consequently, the third respondent's rights under the deed cannot be disturbed unless and until the document is legally nullified by a competent authority.

4. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

5. This Court finds force in the submission made by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 & 2 that, as long as the settlement deed is in existence, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. Hence, the right course available to the petitioner is to approach the civil court by challenging the settlement deed.

In the result, this writ petition stands dismissed with a liberty to approach the Civil Court. No costs.

23-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order VM To:

1. The District Registrar, Ranipet District, Ranipet, Tamilnadu-632 401.

2. The Tahsildhar, Sholingar Taluk, Ranipet District.

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

VM 23-03-2026