Krishnaveni v. The Inspector General Of Registration

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 10.10.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH W.P.(MD)No.1005 of 2021 Krishnaveni

...Petitioner

/Vs./ 1.The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Pattinampakam, Chennai-600 028.

2.The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

3.The District Registration officer, District Registration Office, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli District.

4.The Sub Registrar Officer, Sub-Register Office, Murapanadu Post, Thoothukudi District.

5.G.Mohanraj 6.R.Murugan .

...Respondents

PRAYER:- Petition - filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to cancel the deed 1/4

document in our partitioned hereditary property vide Document No.555/2001 dt. 26.04.2001 at Parpakulam Village, Murapanadu Sub Division, Palayankottai, Tirunelveli District and appropriate action taken to the 5th respondent is acting with the intention of expropriating our hereditary property based on the representation made to 2nd to 4th respondents through registered post on 07.01.2021 with the time limit that may be stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Pandian For Respondents : Mr.B.Saravanan (R1 to R4) Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to cancel the document registered as Document No.555 of 2001 dated 26.04.2001 based on the representation made by the petitioner on 07.01.2021.

2. Heard Mr.M.Pandian, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.B.Saravanan, learned Additional Government Pleader for the official respondents.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the subject property is a hereditary property, which belonged to the petitioner and her family members. The 2/4

petitioner along with her brother and sisters gave a general power of attorney in favour of the fifth respondent. According to the petitioner, the fifth respondent, without their knowledge, executed a sale deed in favour of the sixth respondent on 26.04.2001 and the document was registered as Document No.555 of 2001. This document is sought to be cancelled by considering the representation given by the petitioner before the Registrar.

4. In the considered view of this Court, the ground on which the petitioner is seeking for cancellation of the document cannot be dealt with by the Registrar. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the sale deed executed by the fifth respondent in favour of the sixth respondent, it should have been challenged only before the competent civil Court. That apart, the sale deed that was registered in the year 2001 is challenged after nearly 20 years. This Court does not find any merit in this writ petition and accordingly, the same stands dismissed. No costs.

10.10.2023 NCC : Yes/No Internet :Yes/No Index :Yes/No sm 3/4

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

sm TO:- 1.The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Pattinampakam, Chennai-600 028.

2.The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

3.The District Registration officer, District Registration Office, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli District.

4.The Sub Registrar Officer, Sub-Register Office, Murapanadu Post, Thoothukudi District.

Order made in W.P.(MD)No.1005 of 2021 Dated:

10.10.2023 4/4