K.Pangajam v. The Sub-Registrar
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 23.06.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN and WMP(MD)No.12943 of 2026 K.Pangajam ... Petitioner Vs.
1. The Sub-Registrar, Thamaraipatty @ Chittampatti, Madurai District.
2. Jeeva Rathinam
3. The Secretary to the Government, Law Department, St.George Fort, Chennai.
... Respondents (R-3 is impleaded vide court order dated 02.06.2026 in WMP(MD)No.9841 of 2026 in WP(MD)No.10647 of 2026 by DBCJ) PRAYER :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent vide Refusal Number : RFL/Thamaraipatti/10/2026 dated 30.03.2026 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the 1st respondent to register the settlement deed presented by the petitioner in respect of 1/6 share in 1 acre 46 cents comprising UDR Survey No.111/2B [Old R.S.No.79/2 and S.No.79/2B] in 1/4
Patta No.348, Thamaraipatty Village, Madurai North Taluk within the time frame stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.P.Rajan For R1 & R3 : Mr.M.S.Parthiban, Counsel for State
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.) The writ petition is filed challenging the refusal slip issued by the 1st respondent.
2. When the petitioner presented the settlement deed, the same has been refused by the impugned refusal slip dated 30.03.2026 on the ground that the neither original parent document nor the non traceable certificate issued by the police as contemplated under Section 34-C of the Tamil Nadu Registration (Amendment) Act (Act 1 of 2026) has been produced. The very challenge to the said provision is struck down by this Court in W.P(MD)Nos.7415, 6183, 9526 and 16387 of 2026 by order dated 23.06.2026. Hence, when the provision namely, Section 34-C introduced through the Tamil Nadu Registration (Amendment) Act (Act 1 of 2026) Amendment Act itself has been struck down by this Court, citing the same, insisting production of the original parent document or non traceable certificate by the 1st respondent through the impugned order, in our view, cannot be sustained. 2/4
3. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent vide Refusal Number : RFL/Thamaraipatti/10/2026 dated 30.03.2026, stands quashed and the petitioner is directed to forthwith re-present the settlement deed in question to the 1st respondent for registration and on such re-presentation, the 1st respondent shall register the document within a week thereafter.
4. With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs. [N.S.K., J.] & [M.J.R., J.] Index : Yes / No 23.06.2026 : Yes / No bala To
1. The Sub-Registrar, Thamaraipatty @ Chittampatti, Madurai District.
2. The Secretary to the Government, Law Department, St.George Fort, Chennai.
3/4
N.SATHISH KUMAR , J.
AND M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.
bala ORDER MADE IN DATED :
23.06.2026 4/4