T.Balathandayutham v. B. Meenakshi

1 W.A.(MD)NO.305 OF 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 05.06.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN AND THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA W.A.(MD)Nos.305 & 306 of 2025 and C.M.P.(MD)No.2337 & 2338 of 2025 W.A.(MD)No.305 of 2025 T.Balathandayutham, S/o.Thirunavukkarasu, Rep. by his Special Power of Attorney, M.Rajasekar.

... Appellant / 4th respondent Vs.

1. B.Meenakshi ... 1st Respondent / Writ petitioner

2. The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai.

3. The District Registrar, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

4. The Joint Sub Registrar No.I, Sub Registrar Office, Thanjavur, Thanjavur District.

5. G.Manivannan (R-5 is impleaded vide order dated 30.04.2026 1/6

2 W.A.(MD)NO.305 OF 2025 made in C.M.P.(MD)Nos.5393 and 5379 of 2026) Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to allow the writ appeal by setting aside the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.26348 of 2024 dated 30.10.2024.

W.A.(MD)No.306 of 2025 T.Balathandayutham, S/o.Thirunavukkarasu, Rep. by his Special Power of Attorney, M.Rajasekar.

... Appellant / 4th respondent Vs.

1. B.Meenakshi ... 1st Respondent / Writ petitioner

2. The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai.

3. The District Registrar, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

4. The Sub Registrar, Sub Registrar Office, Karunthattankudi, Thanjavur District.

5. G.Manivannan (R-5 is impleaded vide order dated 30.04.2026 made in C.M.P.(MD)Nos.5393 and 5379 of 2026) 2/6

3 W.A.(MD)NO.305 OF 2025 Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to allow the writ appeal by setting aside the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.25586 of 2024 dated 24.10.2024.

(in both W.As.) For Petitioner : Mr.T.Palanisamy For Respondents : Mr.Selva Adhithya for R-1. Mr.M.P.Senthil, Government Advocate for R-2 to R-4.

Mr.AN.Ramanathan, for Mr.B.Prasanna Vinoth for R-5.

* * *

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was delivered by G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.) Heard both sides.

2. One Meenakshi filed W.P.(MD)No.26348 of 2024 and W.P. (MD)No.25586 of 2024 challenging the refusal check slip issued by the registering officer declining to register the sale deeds executed by her. The registering officer took the stand that since the original documents were not produced, registration cannot be done. This was the stand in one case. In the other case, pendency of the civil suit was a ground for 3/6

4 W.A.(MD)NO.305 OF 2025 refusal. Challenging the stand of the registering officer, these writ petitions were filed.

3. The learned single Judge had held that the stand taken by the registering officer was not sustainable. He relied on the decision of this Court in Subramani Vs. The Sub Registrar(W.P.No.11056 of 2024 dated 26.04.2024) wherein it had been held that the registering officer cannot insist on production of original title documents. Likewise, when the civil Court had not granted any interim order, the registering officer cannot cite a mere pendency of civil suit as a ground for refusing registration. The writ petitions were allowed on 24.10.2024 and 30.10.2024. Aggrieved by the same, Mr.Balathandayutham, husband of Meenakshi filed these writ appeals.

4. There was a delay in filing the writ appeals. The delay was condoned and interim stay was granted on 18.02.2025. 5.Today when the matter was taken for hearing, it is submitted by the learned Government counsel as well as the learned counsel for the subsequent purchaser that the registration process was completed on 06.01.2025 and 08.01.2025. In other words, even before the interim order was granted by the Division Bench, the documents had been registered. 4/6

5 W.A.(MD)NO.305 OF 2025

6. However to satisfy our conscience, we wanted to know in whose name the properties stood. While the learned counsel for the appellant would claim that the properties were purchased in the name of Meenakshi, the fact remains that the documents stood in the name of Meenakshi. Therefore, Meenakshi was very much competent to execute the documents. The appellant's counsel states that the valuable property was sold for a song. If that be so, these issues will have to be agitated elsewhere. In writ jurisdiction, no further interference is possible. With the aforesaid liberty to the appellant, these writ appeals are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. (G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.) & (R.POORNIMA, J.) 5th June 2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No PMU To:

1. The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai.

2. The District Registrar, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

3. The Joint Sub Registrar No.I, Sub Registrar Office, Thanjavur, Thanjavur District. 5/6

6 W.A.(MD)NO.305 OF 2025 G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

AND R.POORNIMA, J.

PMU W.A.(MD)Nos.305 & 306 of 2025 05.06.2026 6/6