The Special Commissioner, v. A.Ravi
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 19.06.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE The Special Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai - 600 034.
... Petitioner Vs
1. A.Ravi
2. N.Mayilsamy
3. R.Dhanasekaran
4. R.Subha
5. V.Palanisamy
6. P.Sumathi
7. P.Sadhasivam
8. P.Subramanian
9. M.Vijayalakshmi 1/7
10. K.P.Thangavelu
11. Annammal
12. S.Palaniammal
13. S.Santhi
14. A.Subbramani
15. T.Manickavasagam
16. Pappathi @ Palaniammal
17. M.Karthikeyan
18. P.Dhanalakshmi
19. B.Chandrasekaran
20. N.Marappan
21. M.Sivasamy
22. K.Rajeswari
23. R.Pappannan
24. K.Muthusamy
25. S.Ramamoorthy
26. R.Balusamy
27. P.Kumudham
28. P.Chokkalingam 2/7
29. K.Marappan
30. R.Rasu
31. G.Devi
32. S.Mani
33. A.Veerakumar
34. M.Amaravathi
35. P.Vaiyapuri
36. K.Varadharajan
37. V.Saraswathi
38. P.Thangavelu
39. G.Dhanalakshmi
40. P.Lakshmi
41. K.Thamilselvi
42. S.Sathiyamoorthy
43. The Inspector of General Of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai 600004
44. The Sub Registrar No.II, Registration Department, Karur.
... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to setaside the order dated 19.05.2016 in W.P(MD)No.15863 of 2012. 3/7
For Petitioner :
Mr.Mr.P.Subbaraj Special Government Pleader For Respondent :
Mr.N.Subramani (R2, R3, R6 to R13, R15, R18, R19, R22 to R25, R27, R28, R30 to R34 and R36 to R41) :
Mr.S.P.Maharajan (R43 & R44) Special Government Pleader :
No Appearance (R1, R4, R14, R16, R17, R20, R21, R35 & R42) :
Not ready in notice (R5, R11, R26 & R9)
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.] The writ order dated 19.05.2016 passed in W.P(MD)No.15863 of 2012 is under challenge in the present writ appeal. 2.Perusal of the writ order impugned reveals that the learned Single Judge has considered the nature of the documents and rights of the parties, which cannot be gone into by the Writ Court in exercise of the powers of judicial review. The presentant of the document has to 4/7
establish that he got a right to register the property under the provisions of the Registration Act. However such an exercise cannot be undertaken by the Writ Court nor a roving enquiry can be conducted to ascertain the rights of a person in a writ proceedings. In the present case, the order deals with the issues on merits which is unnecessary for the High Court. 3.The prayer sought for in the writ petition is to register the document of the petitioner relating to the land in S.No.239/1 situated at Kadappari Village in Karur Taluk. When the writ prayer itself to register the document, the High Court is not expected to go into the rights of the parties and thus the writ order impugned is infirm.
However, any person is at liberty to present a document for registration and the registering authority has to thoroughly scrutinize the document with reference to the provision of the Registration Act and in the present case, the impleading respondent claimed that it is a temple property and therefore, the said objection also to be considered in the context of Section 22(1)(A) of the Registration Act and appropriate decision is to be taken.
4.With these observations, the writ order dated 19.05.2016 in W.P. (MD)No. 15863 of 2012 is set aside and consequently, the writ appeal stands allowed. No costs.
[S.M.S., J.] [A.D.M.C., J.] 19.06.2025 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No NCC:Yes/No LR To The Special Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai - 600 034.
6/7
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
and DR.A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.
LR 19.06.2025 7/7