R.Senathipathi v. The Inspector General Of Registration

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 04.07.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY and W.M.P(MD)No.8774 of 2025 R.Senathipathi ...Petitioner Vs.

1.The Inspector General of Registration, Office of Inspector General of Registration, Chennai.

2.The Sub Registrar, Office of Sub Registrar, Chathirapatti, Dindigul District.

3.V.R.Ezhilarasi 4.R.Kalaiarasi 5.T.Rama Arul Arasan 6.V.Mangaiyarkarasi 7.T.Senthioli Arasan 8.R.Sivagiri Palanisami ...Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order of 2nd respondent in Refusal No.RFL/ Chathirapatti /27/2024, dated 11.06.2024, to quash the same and consequently, to 1/5

direct the 2nd respondent herein to register the settlement deed, dated 11.06.2024. For Petitioner : Mr.K. Govindarajan for Mr.K.Nuthu Ganesa Pandian For R1 and R2 : Mr.D. Sasikumar Additional Government Pleader For R3 to R7 : Mr.D. Venkatesh For R8 : Mr.V.Muthumani

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned order of 2nd respondent in Refusal No.RFL/ Chathirapatti /27/2024, dated 11.06.2024, and consequently, to direct the 2nd respondent herein to register the settlement deed, dated 11.06.2024. 2.The contention of the petitioner is that the land in Survey Nos.54/5, 54/6 belongs to the petitioner's grandfather. Hence, the petitioner is entitled to the said land.

3.The Learned Counsel appearing for the 8th respondent and the Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents 3 to 7 submitted that they are the owners of the property and patta stands in their name. When the patta was disputed between the parties, the parties approached the revenue authorities for cancelling the patta. Already a suit in O.S.No.54 of 2009 is filed on the file of District Municipal Court, Ottanchathiram, which was renumbered as O.S.No.1294 2/5

of 2022 on the file of the Sub Court, Ottanchathiram and the same is pending. Therefore, the revenue authorities declined to cancel the patta issued in the name of the 8th respondent. When the petitioner preferred an appeal before the appellate authority, the order was confirmed. 4.In the meanwhile, the petitioner approached this Court in W.P. (MD)No.4894 of 2022, dated 11-10-2023, challenging the order of Inspector General of Registration, dated 07-08-2020. The Inspector General of Registration has passed the order by relying on the revenue authority's order. Now citing the same proceedings, the official respondents are refusing to register the petitioner's settlement deed. If the petitioner's settlement deed is registered, it would amount to double entry.

5.The respondents cannot cite the suit or any other previous entry and refuse to register the settlement deed, since the respondents cannot sit as a Civil Court and decide title dispute. As on date, there is no interim order or final order restraining the respondents from registering the document. Therefore, the impugned order is quashed and the respondents are directed to register the petitioner's settlement deed. However, it is made clear that the rights of the parties would determined based on the outcome of the suit pending between the parties. 3/5

6.With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

04.07.2025 NCC : Yes / No (2/2) Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes Tmg To 1.The Inspector General of Registration, Office of Inspector General of Registration, Chennai 2.The Sub Registrar Office of Sub Registrar, Chathirapatti, Dindigul District. ... 4/5

S.SRIMATHY , J.

Tmg ORDER MADE IN DATED : 04.07.2025 (2/2) 5/5