Jada Sakthivel v. The District Registrar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 18.11.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI Jada Sakthivel ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Registrar, North Chennai, Registration Department, Kuralagam, Chennai - 600 108.

2.The Inspector of General Registration Department, Tamilnadu Government, Santhome, Chennai - 600 028.

3.The Sub - Registrar, SRO Royapuram, North Chennai.

4.The District Collector, Chennai District, Chennai District Collectectorate, Singaravelar Maaligai, Chennai.

5.The Tahsildar, Tondiarpet Taluk, Chennai - 600 081.

6.Balraj 7.Vasanthasena 1/5

8.Suguna 9.Ruthamma 10.Jayanthi ... Respondents Prayer:

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent Order no.10068/Aa5/2021 dated 17.08.2022 and quash the impugned order passed by the first respondent in the above proceedings and direct the first respondent to cancel the duplicate sale deed bearing Doc.No.869/2002 dated 20.03.2002 registered at SRO, Royapuram.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Harinath For Respondents : Mr.E.Vijay Anand for R1 to R5 Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus seeking to quash the order passed by the first respondent in Order No.10068/Aa5/2021 dated 17.08.2022 and to direct the first respondent to cancel the duplicate sale deed bearing Doc.No.869/2002 dated 20.03.2002 registered at SRO, Royapuram.

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted 2/5

that the petitioner made representation to the first respondent seeking to cancel the duplicate sale deed bearing Doc.No.869/2002 dated 20.03.2002 registered at SRO, Royapuram, however, vide impugned order, the first respondent rejected the petitioner's request. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 3.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 5 submitted that as against the impugned order, there is effective appeal remedy available to the petitioner before the Deputy Inspector General of Registration and without exhausting the appeal remedy, the petitioner has filed this writ petition, which is unsustainable one.

4.As rightly pointed out by the learned Additional Government Pleader, there is effective appeal remedy available to the petitioner before the Deputy Inspector General of Registration. Hence, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, permits the petitioner to file appeal before the Deputy Inspector General of Registration, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If any such appeal is filed by the petitioner, the concerned Deputy Inspector General of Registration 3/5

shall consider the said appeal, on merits and in accordance with law and after affording opportunity to the petitioner as well as the other aggrieved persons and dispose of the same, within a period of twelve weeks thereafter.

5.The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. 18.11.2022 pri Speaking Order/ Non Speaking Order Index: Yes/ No Internet: Yes/ No To 1.The District Registrar, North Chennai, Registration Department, Kuralagam, Chennai - 600 108.

2.The Inspector of General Registration Department, Tamilnadu Government, Santhome, Chennai - 600 028.

3.The Sub - Registrar, SRO Royapuram, North Chennai.

4.The District Collector, Chennai District, Chennai District Collectorate, Singaravelar Maaligai, Chennai.

5.The Tahsildar, 4/5

Tondiarpet Taluk, Chennai - 600 081.

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

pri 18.11.2022 5/5