Elaiyaraja v. The District Registrar (Administration)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 03.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ Elaiyaraja ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Registrar (Administration) Kallakurichi District, Kallakurichi.

2.The Sub Registrar, Rishivanthiyam, Kallakurichi District. ...Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of refusal check slip of the second respondent vide Refusal Number RFL/Rishivanthiyam/23/2025 dated 21.05.2025 and quash the same as illegal and incompetent subsequently direct the second respondent to register the petitioner's document of sale deed dated 21.05.2025 and pass orders. For Petitioner(s) : Mr.N.Ranjith Kumar For Respondent(s) : Mr.P.Harish Government Advocate for R1 and R2

ORDER

1/5

By consent of learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. The present writ petition is filed challenging the refusal check slip in RFL/Rishivanthiyam/23/2025 dated 21.05.2025 passed by the second respondent, whereby the sale deed dated 21.05.2025 was refused to be registered on the premise that protest petitions Nos.52/2025 and 54/2025, in respect of the subject property are stated to be pending.

3. It is submitted by the learned Government Advocate that the property which is sought to be registered is an ancestral property inherited by the vendor along with 7 others. The vendor, without concurrence of other co-owners presented a sale deed for registration. It is for this reason, the other co-owners raised objections and filed protest petitions. It is in view of the protest letter/representation stated to have been made by the other co-owners, the sale deed was refused to be registered.

4. It was submitted by the learned Government Advocate for the 2/5

respondents that they would issue notice to the petitioner, vendor and co-owners in respect of the subject property and conduct an enquiry and thereafter proceed with the registration, if it is otherwise in order, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. If, for any reason, the Sub Registrar is of the view that the registration ought to be refused, he would do so after assigning reasons, which was agreed to by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

5. In the light of the above discussion, the impugned check slip issued by the second respondent dated 21.05.2025 is hereby set aside. The second respondent shall issue notice to the petitioner, vendor and other co-owners in respect of the subject property, and conduct an enquiry and thereafter, register the sale deed, if it is otherwise in order, within a period of four weeks from the date of uploading of the web copy without waiting for the receipt of certified copy. If for any reason, the second respondent refuses to register the sale deed, he shall assign reasons in the refusal slip/order, which was agreed to by both counsel for petitioner as well as respondents. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any views with regard to the merits of the case and it is open to the concerned respondent to consider the case on its own merits and in accordance with law.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. There will be no order 3/5

as to costs.

03.07.2025 Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order Index : Yes/ No mrn To:

1.The District Registrar (Administration) Kallakurichi District, Kallakurichi.

2.The Sub Registrar, Rishivanthiyam, Kallakurichi District. ... 4/5

MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.

mrn 03.07.2025 5/5