R.Nandhini v. The District Registrar
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 07.07.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY R.Nandhini ...Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Registrar Karur District Registrar Office, Karur.
2.The Sub Registrar, Velayuthampalayam Sub Registrar Office, Velayuthampalayam, Karur District.
3.The Assistant Commissioner/ Executive Officer, Arulmigu Balasubramaniaswamy Temple, Pugalimalai, Velayuthampalayam, Karur District. ...Respondents (R3 is suo motu impleaded, vide Court order, dated 29.04.2025 in W.P.(MD)No.12682 of 2025) PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records in connection with the impugned order dated 04.04.2025 passed by the 2nd respondent and consequently, to quash the same and to register the said Mortgage Discharge Receipt with in stipulated time based on the petitioner's representation dated 11.04.2025.
1/4
For Petitioner : Mr.B.Sukumar For R1 and R2 : Mr.S.Suriya Ananth Additional Government Pleader For R3 : Mr.P Athimoolapandian *****
ORDER
The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned order dated 04.04.2025 passed by the 2nd respondent and consequently, to register the said Mortgage Discharge Receipt with in stipulated time based on the petitioner's representation dated 11.04.2025.
2.The petitioner, who is the owner of the property intends to register a mortgage discharge receipt. But the respondents refused to register the same citing that the land belongs to Arulmigu Balasubramania Swamy Temple. The 3rd respondent being a temple claims right over the property. As per Sudha Ravi Kumar and others Vs.The Special Commissioner, HR&CE Department, Chennai and others reported in 2017 (3) CTC 135, the 2nd respondent is supposed to conduct summary enquiry by calling upon the petitioner as well as the objector. Without conducting such enquiry, the impugned order was passed. Therefore, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order, dated 04.04.2025.
2/4
3. Accordingly, the impugned order, dated 04.04.2025 is quashed and the 2nd respondent is directed to issue notice to the petitioner as well as to the 3rd respondent and thereafter, conduct enquiry and pass appropriate orders as per law. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
4. With the above said observations, the writ petition stands allowed. No costs.
07.07.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes Tmg To:
1.The District Registrar Karur District Registrar Office, Karur.
2.The Sub Registrar Velayuthampalayam Sub Registrar Office, Velayuthampalayam, Karur District 3/4
S.SRIMATHY , J.
Tmg ORDER MADE IN DATED : 07.07.2025 4/4