Sathasivam v. The District Registrar
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 15.04.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and W.M.P(MD)No.8149 of 2026 Sathasivam ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Registrar, Registration Department, Karur District, Karur.
2.The Sub Registrar(Joint-II) Karur, Karur District.
3.The Executive Officer, Vennaimalai Arulmigu Balasubramaniya Swamy Thirukoil, Manmangalam Taluk, Karur District.
...Respondents
Writ Petition is filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned check slip having refusal Number:RFL/2 joint SubRegistrar Karur/86/2025 dated 28.11.2025 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to register and release the Discharge receipt dated 13.11.2025 relating to the house in
Natham Survey No.234/C measuring to an extent of 0.84.0 Hectare in which 1073 Sq.feet having Natham Patta dated 06.07.1990 issued by the Tahsildar, Karur in S.F.No.234/C of Kathaparai Village, Karur District Kathapparai Village, Karur District, within time period fixed by this Court. For Petitioner :Mr.V.Sukumar For R1 & R2 :Mr.A.Baskaran Additional Government Pleader For R3 :Mr.P.Athimoola Pandian
ORDER
This writ petition is filed for a certiorarified mandamus challenging the order dated 28.11.2025.
2.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the third respondent/temple would also submit that the petitioner had earlier filed a writ petition in W.P.No.13317 of 2011 and by an order dated 04.04.2022, this Court had given directions to even challenge the patta in the name of Temple. It will be open for the petitioner to produce the said order also during the course of the enquiry.
3.The impugned order is a refusal check slip passed on the ground that to get No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the third respondent temple. In that situation, an order cannot be straight away passed without an enquiry and the matter has been since settled by the Division Bench of this
Court in Sudha Ravi Kumar and another vs. The Special Commissioner and Commissioner, Hindu Religious and charitable Endowments Department, Chennai and others, reported in (2017) 3 CTC 135, the directions in paragraph 25 are extracted hereunder for ready reference. "25.In view of the above discussions, all the writ petitions are allowed and the impugned orders are set aside with the following directions:
(i) The registering authority before whom the document has been presented shall cause service of notice on the parties to the deeds and also to the objector / religious institution, hold summary enquiry, hear the parties and then either register or refuse to register the document by passing an order having regard to the relevant facts as indicated above.
(ii) If the registering authority, refuses to register any document by accepting the objections raised under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, the aggrieved may file a statutory appeal under the Act.
(iii) If the objections raised under Section 22-A of the Act by the religious institution are rejected and the document is registered, the remedy for the religious institution is to either approach this Court by way of a writ petition seeking cancellation of the registration or for any other relief or to approach the civil Court for declaration of the title and for other consequential reliefs. (iv) If the registering authority refuses to register the document acting on the objections raised by a religious institution under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, the parties to the deed will be at liberty to straightaway approach the Civil Court for declaration of title and other relief without availing the opportunity for filing a statutory appeal.
(v) We further direct that if the deed has already been registered without there being any objection by the religious institution
under Section 22-A of the Act, the document shall be returned to the parties concerned leaving it open for the religious institution to approach either the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or the Civil Court for appropriate relief as indicated above. At any rate, the registering authority shall not withhold the deed which has already been registered. (vi) Consequently the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.
4.In view thereof, this writ petition is ordered on the following terms: (i)The impugned refusal check slip dated 28.11.2025 shall stand set aside and the matter is remitted back to the file of the first respondent. (ii)The first respondent shall conduct an enquiry as directed by the Division Bench and both sides will be entitled to produce such proof in respect of their title and depending on the final orders that are passed. (iii)The aggrieved party shall file an appeal in accordance with law. (iv)The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of 10 weeks from the date of receipt of the web copy of the order. without waiting for the certified copy of the order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
15.04.2026 NCC:Yes/No Ns
To 1.The District Registrar, Registration Department, Karur District, Karur.
2.The Sub Registrar(Joint-II) Karur, Karur District.
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
Ns and W.M.P(MD)No.8149 of 2026 15.04.2026