← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/1022/2023dismissed

R.Mariselvam v. The District Registrar (Madurai South)

2023-01-20Honourable Mr Justice G.R.Swaminathan5 pages

1 W.P.(MD)NO.1022 OF 2023 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 20.01.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P.(MD)No.1022 of 2023 R.Mariselvam ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Registrar (Madurai South), Madurai South Mahal Registrar Office, Madurai District.

2. The Sub Registrar, Thirumangalam Sub Registrar Office, Thirumangalam, Madurai District.

3. G.Annam

4. M.C.S.C.Ganesan

5. M.C.S.C.Murugan

6. M.C.S.C.Niranjan

7. P.Kanthasamy

8. Karuppayee

9. V.Pandiyarajan ... Respondents Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 on the basis of the petitioner's 1/5

2 W.P.(MD)NO.1022 OF 2023 representation dated 09.12.2022 to cancel the forged sale deed vide document No.309/2009 dated 23.01.2009 created by respondents 3 to 9 and take action for their illegal acts within the stipulated time period fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sundar For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar, Additional Government Pleader.

* * *

O R D E R

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents.

2. The petitioner wants this Court to direct the first respondent to cancel the petition mentioned document. The petition mentioned document has been styled as forged sale deed in the writ petition.

3. I fail to understand as to how such a document can be called as forgery. In any event, a document of the year 2/5

3 W.P.(MD)NO.1022 OF 2023 2009 cannot be cancelled by the first respondent at this point of time. If the petitioner feels that his civil rights have been infringed by the execution and the registration of the petition mentioned document, it is always open to the petitioner to move the jurisdictional civil Court for protecting his rights.

4. The contention of the petitioner is rejected because the first respondent lacks the authority to cancel the document in question. The petitioner's substantive rights are left intact and the merits of the matter have not been gone into.

5. With this observation, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

20.01.2023 NCS : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No PMU 3/5

4 W.P.(MD)NO.1022 OF 2023 To:

1. The District Registrar (Madurai South), Madurai South Mahal Registrar Office, Madurai District.

2. The Sub Registrar, Thirumangalam Sub Registrar Office, Thirumangalam, Madurai District.

4/5

5 W.P.(MD)NO.1022 OF 2023 G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.

PMU W.P.(MD)No.1022 of 2023 20.01.2023 5/5