Sivalingam v. The State Represented By Its Secretary To Government
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Sivalingam ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The State Represented by its, Secretary to Government Commercial Taxes and Registration Department, Fort St. George, Chennai- 600 009.
2.The District Registrar (Admn.), Registration Department, Tuticorin District.
3.The Sub Registrar, Office of the Registrar, Registration Department, Ettayapuram, Tuticorin District.
4.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Poovananadhaswamy Thirukoil, Koilpatti, Tuticorin District - 628 501 5.Dhanalakshmi 6.Rajendran 1/8
7.Revathi 8.Arunkumar 9.Vijayakumar ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the order passed by the Respondent No.3 in Ref: Nil dated 03.10.2025, quash the same and consequently direct the Respondent No.3 herein to receive and register the sale deed dated 08.07.2024 in respect of RS No.84/11, RS No.84/1M, K.Kumarettayapuram Village, Vilathikulam Panchayat Union, Ettayapuram Sub Division, Palayamkottai Registration District. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Siva Raman For Respondents : Mr.D.Gandhiraj, Spl. Government Pleader for R1 to R3.
Dr.C.Guhaseelarupan for R4.
Mr.D.Senthilkumar for R5 to R9.
ORDER
Heard both sides.
2.Sale deed dated 08.07.2024 executed by Dhanalakshmi, Rajendran and Sivalingam (petitioner herein) in favour of Revathi and 2/8
others conveying the petition mentioned property was presented for registration. Registration was refused by citing objections received from the fourth respondent / temple. Challenging the stand of the registering officer, this writ petition came to be filed. 3.It is seen that the property in question was form part of a much larger extent measuring 77.19 acres which belongs to Ettayapuram Jamin. The Ettayapuram Jamin sold the property in favour of one Velliyammal vide sale deed dated 02.04.1960 (Document No.408/1960). The said Velliyammal subsequently parcelled the land and sold it in favour of a number of persons. Subsequently, some of the villagers joined together and purchased 16.85 acres in the name of the fourth respondent temple vide sale deed dated 27.07.1964 (Document No.774/1964).
4.The writ petitioner herein is son of Late.Alagarsamy Reddiyar. The said Alagarsamy Reddiyar got the petition mentioned property under sale deeds dated 28.07.1964 (Document No.772/1964) and 14.09.1965 (Document No.1197/1965). The revenue record was also mutated in his 3/8
favour. Copy of the patta has been enclosed in the typed set of papers. It is seen that Patta No.28, Kumareddiya Puram that land comprised in S.No.84/1I, 84/1M measuring 2.40 acres stood in the name of Alagarsamy Reddiyar. Alagarsamy Reddiyar passed away on 29.10.2019. The legal heir certificate is also enclosed in the typed set of papers and it is seen therefrom that the writ petitioner as well the respondents 5 to 9 are legal heirs of Late.Alagarsamy Reddiyar. 5.The only question that calls for consideration is whether the subject transaction can be objected to by the fourth respondent / temple. 6.The parties namely, the writ petitioner as well as the respondents 5 to 9 categorically state that they have no claim whatsoever over the land measuring 15.85 acres standing in the name of the fourth respondent / temple.
7.My attention to Patta No.76 and it is seen therefrom that the land measuring an extent of 12 - 2.50 hac. stands in the name of Ayothi Reddiyarkal Community and it is comprised in S.No.80/31, 81/2, 84/1S, 4/8
84/2 and 85/1. It is clarified that out of the five items, the first three items comprised in S.No.80/31, 81/2 and 84/1S alone belong to the temple. I give a direction to the registering officer not to entertain any document from any person in respect of the aforesaid three items comprised in S.No.80/31, 81/2 and 84/1S.
8.Since the interest of the fourth respondent / temple has been adequately protected and there is no substance in the objection raised against the impugned transaction, I quash the impugned refusal check slip. The parties are at liberty to re-present the document. It shall be registered and released subject to fulfilment of other usual formalities. The writ petition stands allowed. No costs.
28.11.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias 5/8
To:
1.Secretary to Government Commercial Taxes and Registration Department, Fort St. George, Chennai- 600 009.
2.The District Registrar (Admn.), Registration Department, Tuticorin District.
3.The Sub Registrar, Office of the Registrar, Registration Department, Ettayapuram, Tuticorin District.
6/8
7/8
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
ias 28.11.2025 8/8