M.Rajendran v. The District Registrar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 14.11.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY M.Rajendran ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Registrar Ariyalur Registrar Office, Ariyalur District.

2. The Sub Registrar Keelapalur, Ariyalur District.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer Ariyalur, Ariyalur District.

4. The Tahsildar Ariyalur, Ariyalur District.

... Respondents Prayer:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to receive for registration and register the settlement deed executed by the petitioner in respect of S.F. No.624/1E, 624/1F, 618/25, 624/1C to an extent of 1.22 ares in Arungal village, Ariyalur District 1/6

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Gokulakrishnan For Respondent : Mr.Stalin Abhimanyu, AGP

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents to register the settlement deed executed by the petitioner in respect of the subject property.

2. Mr.Stalin Abhimanyu, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice on behalf of the respondents.

3. By consent of the parties, the main writ petitions have been taken up for disposal in the admission stage itself.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in this case, the petitioner had purchased the subject property from one Nagamuthu. The said properties were initially mortgaged with Axis Bank, Varanasi and the same was cancelled on 11.04.2023. However, when the petitioner's sale deed dated 21.08.2023 was presented for the 2/6

purpose of registration, the 2nd respondent had orally refused the same by stating that the land is DC land. Hence, this petition.

5. In reply, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent would submit that in this case, no written order was passed by the respondents with regard to the refusal of registration. Hence, the question of refusal would not come into picture. If the petitioner's settlement deed is re-presented before the respondent, the same will be taken into consideration. Hence, he requests this Court to pass appropriate orders.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents and also perused the materials available on record.

7. In the case on hand, it was submitted by the petitioner that when he presented the sale deed for the purpose of registration, the respondent had orally refused to register the same by citing the reason that subject land is DC land.

3/6

8. As rightly contended by the respondent, since no written order was passed by the respondents with regard to the refusal of registration, the question of refusal would not come into picture. In such view of the matter, this Court directs the petitioner to re-present the settlement deed before the respondents. Upon such re-presentation, the respondents are directed to take appropriate decision with regard to the registration of said document, on merits and in accordance with law.

9. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No cost.

14.11.2025 Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No nsa To 4/6

1. The District Registrar Ariyalur Registrar Office, Ariyalur District.

2. The Sub Registrar Keelapalur, Ariyalur District.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer Ariyalur, Ariyalur District.

4. The Tahsildar Ariyalur, Ariyalur District.

5/6

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J., nsa 14.11.2025 6/6