← Library
Madras High CourtWP/37104/2025disposed of

L.Meenakshy v. The Sub Registrar

2025-10-13Honourable Mr Justice Krishnan Ramasamy6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 13.10.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY L.Meenakshy ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar Vadavalli, CTC depot Backside, Maruthamalai Adivaram, Coimbatore - 641 046.

2.The District Registrar (Administration), Coimbatore (North), Office of the District Registrar, Syriyan Church Road, Coimbatore - 641 001.

3.Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome High Road, Chennai - 600 028.

... Respondents Prayer:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to permit the petitioner's counsel to appear on behalf of the petitioner and submit the documents related to the subject matter of the enquiry 1/6

pursuant to the second respondent notice dated 17.07.2025 and 3rd respondent order dated 30.06.2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Saravana Vel For Respondents : Mr.P.Harish, Government Advocate

ORDER

The relief sought for in this writ petition is to direct the second respondent to permit the petitioner's counsel to appear on behalf of the petitioner and submit the documents related to the subject matter of the enquiry pursuant to the second respondent notice dated 17.07.2025 and 3rd respondent order dated 30.06.2025.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner executed a General Power of Attorney to one Mr.P.Paramasivan, who sold petitioner's prime property to his wife viz., P.Jeya for a meagre consideration of Rs.13,00,000/-. Thereafter, the said P.Jeya sold the same property to four persons on 16.11.2023 for a sale consideration of Rs.25,00,000/- But, the total sale consideration paid in cash was about Rs.3,18,75,000/-, and in order to avoid the stamp duty, the sale deed was registered for a sum of Rs.25,00,000/-. Therefore, the petitioner has 2/6

given a complaint before the authorities concerned to enquire into this aspect and collect the balance sale consideration. In this regard, the second respondent initiated the proceedings and called for the petitioner to participate in the enquiry with all relevant documents. Due to age related ailments, the petitioner has not appeared before the second respondent and authorized his counsel to participate in the aforesaid enquiry. But, the second respondent insisted on the presence of the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition, seeking direction to second respondent to permit the petitioner's counsel to appear on her behalf.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a senior citizen, aged about 86 years old and due to the age factor, she is not in a position to participate in the enquiry proceedings. Therefore, he submitted that the petitioner may be permitted to represent the enquiry proceedings through the authorized counsel.

4. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents fairly submitted that in the event the petitioner is not in a position to 3/6

appear in person, let the authorized counsel represent the petitioner.

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

6. In the present case, the issue is relating to suppression of sale consideration of Rs.25,00,000/- instead of actual sale consideration of Rs.3,18,75,000/-. If that being the case, definitely the ex-chequer will lose the stamp duty. Therefore, in order to enquiry on that said aspect, the petitioner has brought into the knowledge of the respondents, by virtue of her complaint. Hence, the respondents are supposed to conduct the enquiry and pass appropriate orders to initiate enquiry proceedings to recover the balance stamp duty.

7. Further, the petitioner has appeared before this Court through Video Conferencing and expressed her inability to participate in the enquiry proceedings. Considering the genuine reason, this Court directs the second respondent to permit the petitioner's authorized counsel to 4/6

appear on behalf of the petitioner and submit the documents related to the subject matter of the enquiry pursuant to the second respondent notice dated 17.07.2025 and third respondent order dated 30.06.2025. It is made clear by this Court that the aforesaid enquiry proceedings should be completed within a period of of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

13.10.2025 Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No vm KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J., vm To 5/6

1.The Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar Vadavalli, CTC depot Backside, Maruthamalai Adivaram, Coimbatore - 641 046.

2.The District Registrar (Administration), Coimbatore (North), Office of the District Registrar, Syriyan Church Road, Coimbatore - 641 001.

3.Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome High Road, Chennai - 600 028.

13.10.2025 6/6