Iruthayaraj v. The Sub Registrar

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.04.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN W.P.(MD) No.12404 of 2025 Iruthayaraj ... Petitioner vs.

The Sub Registrar, Kalayarkovil Sub Registrar Office, Kalayarkovil Taluk, Sivagangai District.

... Respondent PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the Impugned Refusal Check Slip No.RFL/Kalayarkovil/42/2025 dated 02.04.2025 on the file of the Respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequentially directing the Respondent to register the Final Decree in I.A.No.1/2022 in O.S.No.164/2017 in District Court(Civil), Karaikudi, Sivagangai District presented by the Petitioner for registration. For Petitioner :Mr.M.Vivekanandan For Respondent :Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam Government Advocate 1/4

ORDER

The petitioner seeks for the following relief:- "Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the Impugned Refusal Check Slip No.RFL/Kalayarkovil/42/2025 dated 02.04.2025 on the file of the Respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequentially directing the Respondent to register the Final Decree in I.A.No.1/2022 in O.S.No.164/2017 in District Court(Civil), Karaikudi, Sivagangai District presented by the Petitioner for registration."

2.The petitioner had presented a suit for partition and separate possession in O.S.No.164 of 2017. The said suit was decreed. He filed a final decree application and it was also ordered in I.A.No.1 of 2022. When he presented the decree for registration, it was refused under the impugned order. Hence, this writ petition. 3.When the matter was called, Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam points out that in so far as S.No.916/5 is concerned, there is a direction by the Inspector General of Registration that the properties pertaining to PACL should not be registered. He states that in S.No.916/5, PACL 2/4

has registered as many as 30 documents. Therefore, the registration of the decree was refused.

4.A perusal of the decree points out that there are several extents of lands including S.No.916/5. As PACL property is the subject matter of litigation before the Supreme Court, there is a direction not to register documents over its properties. Hence, there shall be a direction to the respondent to register the decree in so far as the properties covered by it other than S.No.916/5. 5.The Writ Petition is ordered, accordingly. No costs. Index :Yes / No 29.04.2025 Internet :Yes / No NCC :Yes / No mm To The Sub Registrar, Kalayarkovil Sub Registrar Office, Kalayarkovil Taluk, Sivagangai District.

3/4

V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

mm 29.04.2025 4/4