Chandran V v. The District Registrar

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 15.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY V.Chandran ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Registrar, O/o.District Registrar, Kanyakumari District.

2.The Sub Registrar, Ganapathipuram Sub-Registrar Office, Kanyakumari District.

3.S.Vijayakumar

...Respondents

Writ Petition is filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders and not to entertain or register any document in respect of the property situated at New Survey No.255/10, Neendakarai B Village, Agastheeswaram Taluk, Kanyakumari District measuring an extent of 40.5 cents presented by the third respondent or their agents in favour of third parties without notifying the petitioner and affording him an opportunity on the basis of the petitioner's objection petition dated 31.01.2026.

For Petitioner :Mr.M.Sankar For R1 & R2 :Mr.F.Deepak Special Government Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition is filed for a mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders and not to entertain or register any document in respect of the property situate at New Survey No.255/10 Neendakarai B Village, Agastheeswaram Taluk, Kanyakumari District, measuring an extent of 40.5 cents presented by the 3rd respondent or their agents in favour of the third party.

2.Upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the material records of the case, the case of the petitioner is that the petitioner entered into a sale agreement with the third respondent in respect of the said land. Pursuant to the sale agreement, advance amount has also been given and the petitioner has also carried out the works including laying of pathway etc, in respect of the said property. Now without executing the sale deed in favour of the petitioner, the third respondent to execute proceeding to alienate the property in favour of third parties and hence, the representation is made.

3.When the matter came up for admission, the learned Special Government Pleader would submit that already notice was issued to the petitioner based on the said representation and finding that it was only a sale agreement, no further orders refusing the document from the 3rd respondent could be issued in the absence of any orders of these competent Civil Court. It is also stated that so far no document has been presented by the 3rd respondent.

4.Even otherwise, if the petitioner is the agreement holder and is aggrieved of the action of the third respondent in trying to alienate the property to third parties, it is for the petitioner to approach the civil Court by way of appropriate relief and the petitioner will also be entitled to move for such interim relief. Keeping open the liberty of the petitioner for the said recourse, this writ petition cannot be entertained and as such the same is disposed of. No costs.

15.04.2026 NCC:Yes/No Ns

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

Ns To 1.The District Registrar, O/o.District Registrar, Kanyakumari District.

2.The Sub Registrar, Ganapathipuram Sub-Registrar Office, Kanyakumari District.

15.04.2026