Ulagaraj v. The District Registrar
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 09.06.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Ulagaraj ... Petitioner(s) - Vs. - 1.The District Registrar, District Registrar Office, Virudhunagar District.
2.The Sub Registrar, Sattur Sub Registrar Office, Virudhunagar District.
... Respondent(s) Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the refusal slip issued by the 2nd respondent dated 13.01.2026 refusing registration by citing an audit-based marking under section 22-A of the Registration Act in respect of the petitioners land comprised in Old Survey No.245/1B1A1, now new Survey No.245/7 over a extent of 4.67 cents situated at Chinnakamanpatti Village, Sattur Taluk, Virudhunagar District and quash the same and direct the 2nd respondent to register the document
presented by the petitioner within a time frame to be fixed by this Honourable Court.
For Petitioner :Mr.T.Dhinesh For R1&R2 :Mr.R.Parthiban Government Standing Counsel
ORDER
This writ petition is filed challenging the refusal check slip dated 13.01.2026.
2.When the petitioner presented the sale deed for registration, the same is now refused on the ground that the house-site is not approved by the DTCP by invoking the provisions of Section 22A(2) of the Act. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that even when the vendor had purchased the property by a registered sale deed dated 22.12.2023 and in the subsequent sale deeds, the property is mentioned as building and in the premises, the building is also put up after due planning approval.
4.The learned Government Standing Counsel is not in a position to refute the said position. Even verifying the earlier sale deeds, the building is also mentioned in the schedule and it is also submitted that the building is also put up after due approval. Therefore, the provision itself is applicable only to the house sites and not already developed buildings. The legal position in this regard has already been held by this Court in Kasturi Bhai Vs. Sub-Registrar(WP(MD)No.25973 of 2025). 5.In view thereof, this writ petition is ordered on the following terms:
(i)The impugned order dated 13.01.2026 shall stand set aside. (ii)Within three weeks from the date of receipt of the web copy of the order, the petitioner shall re-present the document. Upon which the same shall be registered, if there is no other impediment. (iii)No costs.
09.06.2026 NCC:Yes/No
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
Ns To 1.The District Registrar, District Registrar Office, Virudhunagar District.
2.The Sub Registrar, Sattur Sub Registrar Office, Virudhunagar District.
09.06.2026