Nagarajan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.10.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR Nagarajan . .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, rep., by its the District Registrar (Admin), Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2.The Sub Registrar (Joint -II) Registration Office, Palani, Dindigul District.

... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the second respondent to forthwith return the registered sale document No. 1365/2023 dated 27.04.2023 after due process, on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 12.09.2024 within a time stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.M.Vishnu Varthanan For Respondents : Mr.M.Siddharthan Additional Government Pleader Page No.1/4

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking for a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to forthwith return the registered sale document No.1365/2023 dated 27.04.2023 after due process, on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 12.09.2024 within a time stipulated by this Court.

2. Mr.M.Siddharthan, learned Additional Government Pleader, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that he obtained a decree for specific performance in respect of the suit property in T.S.No.421/31, 421/32A and 421/32B measuring an total extent of 22.041 sq.ft situated at Ward No.4, Block No.8, Palani Town, Dindigul District and in execution petition, sale deed has also been executed in his favour. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though the sale deed was registered in favour of the petitioner as early as on 27.04.2023 in Doc.No.1365/2023, the second respondent has not returned the said registered deed stating Page No.2/4

that inspection would be conducted. In this regard, the learned Additional District Judge(Fast Track Court), Palani, has also directed the second respondent/Sub Registrar to produce the original document, however, the document has not been produced. It is the further contention of the petitioner that inspection has also not made by the respondents.

4. In such view of the matter, this Court directs the second respondent to make inspection on the subject property, immediately and produce the document as directed by the District Court.

5. With the above observation, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

22.10.2024 Index :

Yes / No NCC : Yes / No Rmk To 1.The District Registrar (Admin), Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2.The Sub Registrar (Joint -II) Registration Office, Palani, Dindigul District.

Page No.3/4

N.SATHISH KUMAR , J.

Rmk 22.10.2024 Page No.4/4