Velusamy v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 08.07.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY and W.M.P.(MD)No.13540 of 2025 Velusamy ... Petitioner Vs.
The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Sub Registrar, Office of Puliyangudi Sub Registrar, Puliyankudi, Tenkasi District.
...Respondent
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the entire records pertaining to the Impugned Refusal slip Reference No. RFL/Puliyangudi / 14/2025 dated 06.02.2025, issued by the respondent in the petitioner's Transaction No.REG202502061003987, dated 06.02.2025 and to quash the same is illegal and consequently, to direct the respondent to register the petitioner's settlement deed dated 06.02.2025 presented via transaction No. REG202502061003987 dated 06.02.2025 and to issue registered document number and to release the document after registration within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.P.M.Vishnuvarthanan For Respondent : Mr.S.Suriya Ananth Government Advocate ***** 1/4
ORDER
The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned refusal slip Reference No. RFL/Puliyangudi/14/2025 dated 06.02.2025, issued by the respondent in the petitioner's Transaction No.REG202502061003987, dated 06.02.2025 and to quash the same is illegal and consequently, to direct the respondent to register the petitioner's settlement deed dated 06.02.2025 presented via transaction No. REG202502061003987 dated 06.02.2025 and to issue registered document number and to release the document after registration within the time stipulated by this Court.
2.Through the impugned order, the respondents have stated that the petitioner has obtained 150.54 sq.m. through the settlement deed. However, the respondent stated that on ground, there is no land available in the Survey No. 93/12, since already a document is registered in Survey No.93/12 for total extent. 3.The said impugned order is erroneous, since the petitioner is in possession of the land in two Survey Nos.93/12 and 93/11 to an extent of 250 sq.m and 193 sq.m respectfully. But, the impugned refusal slip has taken Survey No.93/12 alone and has left to take the Survey No.93/11 into consideration to an extent of 193 sq.m. Hence, the impugned order is erroneous. Moreover, the 2/4
respondent cannot raise all these query. The statutory duty of the respondent is only to register the document without raising any title dispute or without raising any dispute regarding the extent of the property or other details of the property. In the present case, the respondent has raised a dispute regarding the details of the property. Hence, the impugned order is quashed and consequently, the respondent is directed to register the sale deed.
4.With the above observations, this Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
08.07.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes Tmg To:
The Sub Registrar, Puliyangudi Sub Registrar Office, Puliyankudi, Tenkasi District.
3/4
S.SRIMATHY , J.
Tmg ORDER MADE IN DATED : 08.07.2025 4/4