Rose Mary v. The Inspector General Of Registration

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 03.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ Rose Mary Petitioner(s) Vs 1.The Inspector General of Registration 100, Santhome Highroad, Mullima Nagar, Mandevelipakkam, R.A. Puram, Chennai.

2.The District Registration (Admin), Office of the Deputy Registrar, Tirupattur.

3.The Sub-Registrar, Office of the Sub-Registrar, Tirupattur, Tirupattur District.

Respondent(s) PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's appeal dated 23.12.2024 sent via registered post and dispose the same within the stipulated period.

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.T.Annamalai 1/6

For Respondent(s) : Mr.U.Baranidharan 1, 2, 3 and newly Special Government Pleader impleaded respondent

ORDER

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 praying for a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's appeal dated 23.12.2024.

3. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for petitioner would submit that she is the lawful owner of the properties comprised in Survey No.662, measuring an extent of 1.93 acres vide Documents No.3967/2009 in Patta No.95, belonged to her husband Late Mr.Arumainathan and Survey No.663, measuring an extent of 2.97 acres vide Document No.1531/1929 in Patta No.27. He would submit that they may be permitted to file a protest letter along with appropriate fee which may be considered as and when any other document is sought to be registered in respect of the subject property and seeks leave to file a protest letter before the Sub-Registrar.

2/6

4. At the outset, it is suggested by Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader for respondents that the petitioner may be permitted to submit a protest letter against registration of subject properties and the same would be considered as an when any document is sought to be presented for registration in respect of the subject property.

5. Learned counsel for petitioner would seek liberty to file a protest letter before the Sub-Registrar, Tirupattur.

6. The Sub-Registrar, Office of the Sub-Registrar, Tirupattur, Tirupattur District is suo moto impleaded as 3rd respondent. Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for 3rd respondent.

7. In view thereof, the writ petition stands closed. It is open to the petitioner to submit protest letter against registration of subject properties before the appropriate respondent. If any such protest letter is submitted, the same shall be considered by the appropriate respondent if and when any document is sought to be presented for registration in respect of the subject properties. 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 matter on its own 3/6

merits and in accordance with law. No costs.

03.07.2025 Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order Index : Yes/ No mka Note: Registry is directed to carry out necessary amendments in the cause title To:

4/6

1.The Inspector General of Registration 100, Santhome Highroad, Mullima Nagar, Mandevelipakkam, R.A. Puram, Chennai.

2.The District Registration (Admin), Office of the Deputy Registrar, Tirupattur.

3.The Sub-Registrar, Office of the Sub-Registrar, Tirupattur, Tirupattur District.

5/6

MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.

mka 03.07.2025 6/6