P.Srinivasan v. Inspector General Of Registration
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.08.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ 1.P.Srinivasan 2.P.Murali 3.A.Gnana Mohan Petitioner(s) Vs 1.Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome High Road, Chennai-600 028.
2.The Joint-II Sub-Registrar, Office of Sub-Registrar, Krishnagiri.
Respondent(s) 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 the 2nd respondent herein vide RFL / Krishnagiri Joint II / 36 / 2025 dated 16.05.2025 quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to register the sale deed dated 16.05.2025 executed by thee 1st and 2nd petitioner in favour of the 3d petitioner in respect of the property situate in Agasipalli village, Krishnagiri District bearing Survey no.666/1A3 dry hec. 0.09.0 asst 0.50 new sub-division survey no.666/1A3B and survey No.666/1A3B1 - extent 0.03.16 hec or 0.07-3/4cnets, asst 0.18 and survey No.666 / 1A4 Dry Hec 0.09.0 asst 0.53 sub bearing Survey no.666/ 1A4A1, extent 0.05.65 hec or 014 cents totally 0.21-3/4 cents presently sub-divided as 666/1A3B1A, 666/1A3B2, 666/1A4A1A, 666/1A4A2 and 666/1A4B.
For Petitioner(s) : Mrs.A.L.Gandhimathi 1/4
Senior Counsel for Mr.C.T.Murugappan For Respondent(s) : Mr.U.Baranidharan Special Government Pleader
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 Certiorarified Mandamus challenging the refusal check slip dated 16.05.2025 whereby the sale deed was refused registration.
3. It is submitted by the learned Senior Advocate for petitioners that if petitioners were afforded an opportunity they would have put forth their objection to the reasons stated in the refusal check slip.
4. At the outset, it is submitted by Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Government Advocate for respondents that it is open to the petitioners to put forth their objections/response to the refusal check slip along with documentary evidence. If any such response/objection is submitted, the concerned respondent would consider the same and appropriate orders would be passed in accordance 2/4
with law.
5. In the circumstances, this Court is inclined to set-aside the impugned refusal check slip while granting liberty to the petitioners to re-present the sale deed along with their explanation / response to the reasons set-out in the refusal check slip. If any such response is submitted by petitioners, the 2nd respondent shall consider and thereafter proceed to register the same, if it is otherwise in order. If for any reason the same is rejected, the registering authority may do so after assigning appropriate reasons for such refusal by way of refusal check slip/ order. No costs.
18.08.2025 Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order Index : Yes/ No mka To:
1.Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome High Road, Chennai-600 028.
2.The Joint-II Sub-Registrar, Office of Sub-Registrar, Krishnagiri.
3/4
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
mka 18.08.2025 (1⁄2) 4/4