Venkataraman Sambasivan v. The Inspector General Of Registration

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED :07.11.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI Venkataraman Sambasivan .. Petitioner Vs.

1. The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome high Road, Mullima Nagar, Mandavelipakkam, Rajannamalaipuram, Chennai - 600 028.

2. The District Registrar, District of South Chennai, No.9, Jennis road, 2nd Floor, Saidapet, Chennai 600 015.

3. The Sub-Registrar, Pallavaram, Chennai

4. The commissioner of Police, Tambaram Division, Chennai 600 119.

5. The Tahsildar, Pallavaram Taluk, Pallavaram, Chengalpattu district.

6. The Tahsildar, Ambattur Taluk, Chennai - 600 053.

1/6

7. The Municipal Commissioner, Tambaram City Municipal Corporation, Pallavaram Office, Chennai - 600 044.

8. The Assistant Engineer, TANGEDCO, Radhanagar 33/11 KV SS Complex, Radhanagar SS, Shanthi Nagar Chennai - 600 044.

9. Mrs. N. Lakshmi

10. Mr. Y. Gowthaman ..Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider representation/complaint dated 04.04.2022 and to cancel the forged Sale Deed dated 12.08.2021 registered as Document no.6704 of 2021 by the 3rd respondent and to pass orders. For Petitioner : Mr.P. Arumugarajan For Respondents 1 to 6 : Mr. E. Vijay Anand Addl. Government Pleader For Respondent 7 and 8 : M/s T.I. Ramanathan For Respondent 9 : Tapal Returned 2/6

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 04.04.2022.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the subject property belongs to one S.Srinivasan who is a mentally retarded person and the petitioner is the care taker of the said S.Srinivasan. While so the 9th respondent herein allegedly executed a sale deed in favour of the 10th respondent. Hence the petitioner made a complaint before the first respondent to cancel the alleged sale deed dated 12.08.2021 which was registered as Document No.6704 of 2021. However no action was taken, Hence the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it would be suffice if this Court issues a direction to the first respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 04.04.2022 within a stipulated time as fixed fixed by this Court. Hence prays this Court for appropriate orders.

3/6

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

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the limited relief sought for by the petitioner, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 04.04.2022 after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as private respondents and pass orders, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above terms, this present writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

07.11.2022 smn Speaking Order/ Non Speaking Order Index: Yes/ No Internet: Yes/ No 4/6

To

1. The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome high Road, Mullima Nagar, Mandavelipakkam, Rajannamalaipuram, Chennai - 600 028.

2. The District Registrar, District of South Chennai, No.9, Jennis road, 2nd Floor, Saidapet, Chennai 600 015.

3. The Sub-Registrar, Pallavaram, Chennai 5/6

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

smn 07.11.2022 6/6