Adheenakarthar v. The District Registrar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 07.10.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY Adheenakarthar ...
Petitioner Vs.
1. The District Registrar, The Office of The District Registrar, Sandhaimedu Dhindivanam.
2.The Sub Registrar, The Office of Sub Registrar, Vanur, Villupuram District.
3.D.Krishnan 4.K.Sivagami 5.Mohana Sundaram 6.K.Gopinath 7.D.Durai ...
Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to consider and dispose of petitioner's representation dated 9.09.2025 and 1/6
refuse to register the sale deeds in which the writ petitioners land in S.No. 39/2 is wrongly shown as Pathway.
For Petitioner : Ms.C.Jaya Chitra For Respondents : Mr.P.Harish Government Advocate (R1 and R2) ***
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to consider and dispose of petitioner's representation dated 9.09.2025 and refuse to register the sale deeds in which the writ petitioner's land in S.No. 39/2 is wrongly shown as Pathway.
2. Mr.P.Harish, learned Government Advocate (Taxes) takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the land in S.No.39/2, Bommaiyarpalayam Village, Villupuram District belongs to the petitioner and the adjacent land in S.No.39/1 belongs to the 3rd respondent. While so, the 3rd respondent had executed settlement deed in favour of his family members, wrongly describing the 2/6
Southern Boundary as a pathway instead of petitioner's land. In this regard, the petitioner submitted a representation to the concerned Tahsildar not to issue patta in favour of the settlees i.e., the respondents 4 to 6 as per the aforesaid settlement deed executed by the 3rd respondent. But the same was not considered. Thereafter, the petitioner came to know that Respondents 4 to 6 who are the Settlees have executed the Registered Sale Deed dated 20.08.2025 in favour of the 7th respondent by conveying their property in Survey No.39/1, in which also the petitioner's southern boundary is incorrectly shown as pathway instead of petitioner's property. Hence, the petitioner submitted a representation to the 1st respondent in the form of protest petition not to register any Sale Deed with respect to S.No.39/2. As the same did not evoke any response the present writ petition has been filed.
4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would fairly accepted the contention made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that in the event if any registration is made in future with respect to the Survey No.39/2, the petitioner's request will be considered, after issuing notice to the 3/6
petitioner and the persons concerned and decision will be taken only after hearing the petitioner as well as the persons concerned.
5. Recording the submission made by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, this Court directs the respondents 1 and 2 to give notice to the petitioner as well as to the persons concerned in case if any registration has to be done with respect to S.No.39/2 and take decision only after hearing the petitioner and the persons concerned.
6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. 07.10.2025 Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No arr To 4/6
1. The District Registrar, The Office of The District Registrar, Sandhaimedu Dhindivanam.
2.The Sub Registrar, The Office of Sub Registrar, Vanur, Villupuram District.
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J., arr 5/6
07.10.2025 6/6
7/6