M/S.Lara Traders v. The Tahsildar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 16.10.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY M/s.Lara Traders Rep. By its Partner Mrs.Lakshmi Prabha ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Tahsildar, Walaja Taluk, Walaja Nagar, Ranipet District.

2.The Sub-Registrar, Walaja Nagar, Ranipet District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire records in pursuant to the refusal check slip issued by the second respondent vide Refusal Number.RFL/Walaja/10/2025 dated 30.04.2025 and quash the same with a consequential direction to the second respondent to register the sale agreement dated 30.04.2025 entered between the petitioner and C.Rajalakshmi without reference to the first respondent's report classifying the land and Building measuring 1.77 acres situated at Ammoor Village, Walaja Taluk, Ranipet District comprised in S.No.355/1B as "Panchami (D.C) Land". For Petitioner : Ms.S.Sri Ranjini

For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.P.Harish, Government Advocate

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed to call for the entire records in pursuant to the refusal check slip issued by the second respondent vide Refusal Number.RFL/Walaja/10/2025 dated 30.04.2025 and quash the same with a consequential direction to the second respondent to register the sale agreement dated 30.04.2025 entered between the petitioner and C.Rajalakshmi without reference to the first respondent's report classifying the land and Building measuring 1.77 acres situated at Ammoor Village, Walaja Taluk, Ranipet District comprised in S.No.355/1B as "Panchami (D.C) Land".

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner purchased a property comprised in S.No.355/1A, to an extent of 1.77 acres, situated at Ammoor Village along with one Mr.Subbaiyan vide sale deed dated 29.03.2012. Thereafter, they both decided to sell the property, accordingly one Mrs.C.Rajalakshmi intended to purchase the same. Thus a sale agreement was entered between them. When the petitioner submitted the sale agreement dated 30.04.2025 for registration, the second respondent refused to register the same and issued a refusal check

slip dated 30.04.2025 stating that the subject matter property is a "Panchami Land".

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the revenue authority has issued patta to the aforesaid land vide Patta No.643. Therefore, having issued the patta and taking a stand that it is a Panchami Land by the second respondent is not sustainable.

4. After getting instruction, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would submit that since the aforesaid land is a Panchami land, the respondents are not in a position to register the same. Hence, he prays for appropriate order.

5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on records.

6. In the present case on hand, the second respondent rejected the sale agreement dated 30.04.2025 submitted by the petitioner citing the reason that it is a Panchami Land. However, the fact remains that the revenue authority has issued Patta for the said land vide patta No.643. Therefore, it is clear and evident that it is not a Panchami Land. Thus,

the respondents cannot come on the way and stop the registration of sale agreement by citing the reason stated supra.

7. Such being the case, I find force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that having issued a patta by the revenue authority for the aforesaid land, the second respondent cannot prevent the petitioner from registration of sale agreement for selling the property. Hence, this Court feels it would be appropriate to set aside the impugned order dated 30.04.2025 passed by the second respondent. Accordingly, the said order is set aside. Consequently, the respondents are directed to register the sale agreement dated 30.04.2025, immediately upon the re-presentation of the same by the petitioner. In the result, this writ petition stands allowed. No costs. 16.10.2025 vm Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-speaking order To

1.The Tahsildar, Walaja Taluk, Walaja Nagar, Ranipet District.

2.The Sub-Registrar, Walaja Nagar, Ranipet District.

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

vm

16.10.2025