K.Pushpalatha v. The Tahsildar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 14.10.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY 1.K.Pushpalatha
2. K.Giri ... Petitioners ..Vs..
1. The Tahsildar Tindivanam Taluk, Villupuram District.
2.The Joint Sub-Registrar-I, Tindivanam.
3.S.Venkatepathi@Hari ... Respondents Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 2nd respondent's refusal slip number RFL/1 dated 25.06.2024 and quash the same as illegal, consequently direct the 2nd respondent to register the sale deed 19.06.2024 executed by the petitioners in favour one Parameshwari.
1/6
For Petitioners : Mr.M.Sridhar For Respondents : Mr.U.Bharidhar (R1 and R2) Special Government Pleader Mr.M.R.Thangavel (R3)
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the refusal slip number RFL/1 dated 25.06.2024 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal, consequently direct the 2nd respondent to register the Sale Deed dated 19.06.2024 executed by the petitioners in favour one Parameshwari.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners intended to sell the subject properties to one Parameshwari. Therefore, they executed a Sale Deed in favour of the said Parameshwari on 25.06.2024 and when the same was presented before the 2nd respondent for registration after paying all the necessary stamp duty, the 2nd respondent without conducting any enquiry under Rule 55 A of the Tamil Nadu Registration Rules, and without providing any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, by merely considering the objections of the 3rd respondent has simply refused to register the Sale Deed vide the 2/6
Refusal Slip dated 25.06.2025.
3. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would fairly submit that no enquiry was conducted before issuing the Refusal Slip. However, he would submit that the respondent concerned will conduct the enquiry and take a decision with regard to the registration of the Sale Deed. Hence, he prayed for appropriate orders.
4. Heard both sides. Perused the records.
5. In the present case, it appears that the petitioners executed the Sale Deed in favour of one Parameshwari on 19.06.2024 and when the same was presented before the 2nd respondent for registration, the said Authority rejected the same vide the Refusal Slip dated 25.06.2024 on the ground that the objections have been made by the 3rd respondent with respect to the property in question. It is the duty of the 2nd respondent to conduct enquiry under Rule 55 A of the Tamil Nadu Registration Rules, 3/6
after issuing notice to either parties and arrive at a conclusion regarding the genunity of the document. Admittedly, no such enquiry has been conducted. Hence, this Court is inclined to set aside the Refusal Slip dated 25.06.2024 of the 2nd respondent.
6. Accordingly, the Refusal Slip dated 25.06.2024 issued by the 2nd respondent is set aside. The petitioners shall re-present the Sale Deed before the 2nd respondent, and on such representation being made, the 2nd respondent shall conduct enquiry after issuing notice to the petitioner as well as to the 3rd respondent and also after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to either parties, shall take decision with regard to the registrarion of the Sale Deed, based on the materials available on record.
7. In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed. No costs.
8. WMP.No.33090 of 2024 filed to permit the petitioners to join 4/6
together to file single writ petition is allowed. 14.10.2025 Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No arr To
1. The Tahsildar Tindivanam Taluk, Villupuram District.
2.The Joint Sub-Registrar-I, Tindivanam.
5/6
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J., arr 14.10.2025 6/6