← Library
Madras High CourtWP/20906/2024dismissed

R.P. Thulasinathan v. The Inspector General Of Registration

2024-07-29Honourable Mr Justice N. Sathish Kumar5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29.07.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR R.P.Thulasinathan ...

Petitioner versus 1.The Inspector General of Registration, Office of the Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai - 600 028.

2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Office of the Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Integrated Building of Registration Department, Veppamaram Street, Velapadi, Vellore - 632 001.

3.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Office of the Deputy Inspector General of Registration, District Registrar Office, District Collector Office, 4th Floor, C-Block, Tirupathur, Tirupathur District.

4.The Sub Registrar, Jolarpettai Sub Registrar Office, Nethaji Road, S.Kodiyour, Jolarpettai - 635 851.

Tirupathur District.

1/5

5.Anandha Kumar 6.E.Bharat ...

Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 07.06.2024 for cancelling the sale deed in Doc.No.1678 of 2024 dated 03.05.2024 executed by the fifth respondent in favour of the sixth respondent within the stipulated period by affording personal opportunity of hearing. For Petitioner :

Mr.M.Sathish Kumar For Respondent Nos.1 to 4 :

Mr.M.Shajahan Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

By consent of both sides, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itself.

2.

This Writ Petition is filed to direct the third respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 07.06.2024 for cancelling the Sale Deed dated 03.05.2024 executed by the fifth respondent in favour of the sixth respondent.

2/5

3.

I have perused the representation. The very representation itself indicates that the petitioner has executed a power of attorney by appointing one Anandha Kumar. Pursuant to the said power deed, it appears that he sold the property. Now, the Sale Deed is sought to be cancelled. As long as the power deed is not cancelled and power of attorney is in existence, any act by the power agent will bind on the principle. If at all the power of attorney has not accounted for the principle, the remedy lies somewhere else in the civil court, not in the writ court, seeking a direction to cancel the document that too by the Registrar, who has no such power. 4.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. 29.07.2024 Speaking order / Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No : Yes / No sri 3/5

To 1.The Inspector General of Registration, Office of the Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai - 600 028.

2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Office of the Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Integrated Building of Registration Department, Veppamaram Street, Velapadi, Vellore - 632 001.

3.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Office of the Deputy Inspector General of Registration, District Registrar Office, District Collector Office, 4th Floor, C-Block, Tirupathur, Tirupathur District.

4.The Sub Registrar, Jolarpettai Sub Registrar Office, Nethaji Road, S.Kodiyour, Jolarpettai - 635 851.

Tirupathur District.

4/5

N.SATHISH KUMAR , J.

sri 29.07.2024 5/5