Madras High CourtWP(MD)/2356/2022disposed of

Sekkappan Pl v. The Inspector General Of Registrastion

2022-02-04Honourable Mr Justice C.V. Karthikeyan2 pages

W.P.(MD).No.2356 of 2022 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 04.02.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN W.P.(MD).No.2356 of 2022 PL.Sekkappan ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Inspector General of Registration, The Appellate Authority, Chennai.

2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Madurai Division Combined Office of Registration, TNAG Nagar, Rajakambiram, Y.Othakadai, Madurai.

... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, by directing the second respondent to dispose of the petitioner's Appeal vide Na.Ka.No.6190/M3/2019 pending on the file of the second respondent within the time stipulated by this Court in accordance with law.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.C.Maniarasu For Respondents : Mr.D.Ghandiraj, Special Government Pleader.

ORDER

Heard Mr.K.C.Maniarasu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.D.Ghandiraj, learned Special Government Pleader who takes notice for the respondents.

2. The present Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of Mandamus seeking a direction to the second respondent/the Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Madurai Division Combined Office of Registration, TNAG Nagar, Rajakambiram, Y.Othakadai, Madurai to complete the entire appeal process now pending on his file in Na.Ka.No.6190/M3/2019.

3. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that alleging forgery in the execution of the particular https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

W.P.(MD).No.2356 of 2022 documents, the petitioner herein had given a complaint to the District Registrar under Section 68(2) of the Registration Act 1908. However, the District Registrar had dismissed the said application. Thereafter, the petitioner had filed an appeal actually before the first respondent who had forwarded the papers to the second respondent.

4. Perusal of the documents filed along with the Writ Petition shows that the second respondent had also issued notice to the contesting parties to appear for the enquiry. Learned counsel states that the enquiry had been completed but orders had not been passed.

5. Therefore, a Mandamus is issued to the second respondent to examine the records, examine the enquiry proceedings and thereafter pass a considered order within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AD-I) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) Nsr Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

To 1.The Inspector General of Registration, The Appellate Authority, Chennai.

2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Madurai Division Combined Office of Registration, TNAG Nagar, Rajakambiram, Y.Othakadai, Madurai. +1 CC to M/s.K.C.MANIYARASU, Advocate ( SR-4615[F] dated 07/02/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL.GP ( SR-4544[F] dated 07/02/2022 ) W.P.(MD).No.2356 of 2022 04.02.2022 KMV(CO) TR(21.02.2022) 2P 5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2