Muthusamy S v. The Inspector General Of Registration

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 15.06.2026

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and W.M.P(MD)No.12259 of 2026 S.Muthusamy ... Petitioner .Vs.

1.The Inspector General of Registration, Office of the Inspector General of Registration, Santhom High Road, Chennai.

2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Office of the Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Rajakambeeram, Y.Othakadai, Madurai.

3.The District Registrar, Office of the District Registrar, Dindigul Registration District, 4.The Sub Registrar, Kannivadi Sub Registrar Office, 5.Kalpanadevi 6.N.Marivel 1/6

7.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the District Superintendent of Police, 8.The Inspector of Police, Kannivadi Police Station, 9.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, 10.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-corruption Unit, ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate action by invoking Sections 82 and 83 of the Registration Act, 1908 against the respondents 4 to 6 for execution of forged documents without any valid title deeds and consequently, direct the respondents 7 to 10 to take appropriate criminal action against the respondents 5 and 6 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 15.06.2026.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Kathiresan For Respondents : Mr.S.Vashik Ali Government Standing Counsel for R1 to R4 Mr.I.Murugesan Government Advocate (Crl. side) for R7 to R10 2/6

O R D E R

The writ petition is filed for a mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate action by invoking Sections 82 and 83 of the Registration Act, 1908, against the respondents 4 to 6 for the execution of a forged document without any valid title deeds and consequently, directing the respondents 7 to 10 to take appropriate criminal action against the respondents 5 and 6 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 15.06.2026.

2. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, it can be seen that the petitioner's father, Sivaperumal Asari, married Subbammal @ Vellaiammal, and through her he had children, namely, Muthusamy, Murugan, Kandhavel, Alagu Meena and Vasanthi. Prior to that, he had also married one Maruthayiammal, and two sons, namely, Nachi Muthu and Chinnasamy, were born through the said wedlock. While so, one of the sons of Nachimuthu, namely, Marivel, is said to have executed a gift deed in favor of his wife with reference to his undivided share. However, by producing a fraudulent legal heirship certificate, excluding the names 3/6

of some of the legal heirs and claiming an excess share, the above document is alleged to have been executed. The petitioner, therefore, prays that criminal action should be taken.

3. It can thus be seen that the dispute is between co-sharers. It cannot be said that any forgery or impersonation has been committed. As far as the legal heirship certificate is concerned, if the same was issued without including any of the legal heirs who ought to have been included in the legal heirship certificate dated 04.05.2007, it will be open for the petitioner to make a representation to the appropriate authority. Upon such representation, the matter can be considered for taking appropriate steps to include the names of the omitted legal heirs.

4. It is also further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, even as per the parent deed referred to in the document, the properties were allotted only to the father's brother. The further contention is that the petitioner's possession is now sought to be disturbed. Thus, it can be seen that the questions raised relate to title and possession, which can be considered only if the petitioner approaches the 4/6

appropriate civil Court, and are not matters to be dealt with under Sections 82 and 83 of the Registration Act, 1908.

5. In view thereof, while keeping open the liberty of the petitioner to approach the appropriate civil Court and also the Revenue Authorities with reference to the legal heirship certificate, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

15.06.2026 NCC : Yes/No sji To 1.The Inspector General of Registration, Office of the Inspector General of Registration, Santhom High Road, Chennai.

2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Office of the Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Rajakambeeram, Y.Othakadai, Madurai.

5/6

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY.,J.

sji 3.The District Registrar, Office of the District Registrar, Dindigul Registration District, 4.The Sub Registrar, Kannivadi Sub Registrar Office, 5.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the District Superintendent of Police, 6.The Inspector of Police, Kannivadi Police Station, 7.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, 8.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-corruption Unit, 15.06.2026 6/6