A.Karunakaran v. The District Registrar
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 13.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN & W.M.P.(MD)No.25502 of 2025 A.Karunakaran ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Registrar, Trichirappalli District, Cantonment, Trichirappalli.
2.The Sub Registrar, Kattuputhur Sub-Registration Office, Kattuputhur, Trichirappalli District.
3.S.Singaravelan 4.G.Ranjanidevi 5.G.Ravichandran 6.G.Manisekaran 7.S.Barathy 8.G.Gopinathan 9.K.Devi 1/6
10.K.Raghunathan 11.K.Arun 12.K.Satheesh 13.Vijaya 14.Sumathi 15.Vanaja 16.S.Meenatchi Sundari 17.M.Meenakumari 18.R.Veerapandian 19.T.Indhirani ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to forbear the respondents 1 and 2 from registering any document in respect of survey nos. 216/2 and 216/3 in Kattuputhur West village, Thottiyam Taluk, Trichirappalli District in line with the Docket order of attachment passed in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in O.S.No. 352 of 2025 Dated 26.08.2025 on the file of the Principal District Judge Trichirappalli.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.S.Kathiravan For Respondents : Mr.M.Senthil Ayyanar Government Advocate for R1 & R2 : Mr.Raguvaran Gopalan for R3 to R19 2/6
ORDER
Heard both sides.
2. One Meenakshiammal owned the petition mentioned property. She had five cents. She executed a Will dated 26.10.1956 diving the property into five shares with definite boundaries and individually, bequeathing the same. The third respondent herein hails from one such branch. In that branch, there are other members also (six sharers in all). The third respondent appears to have borrowed money from the writ petitioner herein. He committed default. The writ petitioner filed O.S.No.352 of 2025 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Trichy for recovery of money. He also filed I.A.No.1 of 2025 under Order 38 of C.P.C to effect attachment before Judgment. The Court below had granted attachment order in respect of the share of the third respondent. On the strength of the said Judgment order, this writ petition has been filed to restrain the registering authority from registering any document in respect of the petition mentioned survey numbers at the instance of the respondents 4 to 17.
3. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner reiterated all the contentions set out in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and called upon this Court to grant relief as prayed for.
3/6
3. I am not able to accept the said submission. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the contesting private respondents, the attachment order has been made only as against the third respondent. He is the sole defendant in the suit. The respondents 4 to 19 are not parties to the suit. The respondents 4 to 19 have not had any kind of transaction with the writ petitioner / plaintiff. Therefore, the petitioner cannot lay any claim against the respondents 4 to 19. He cannot seek to restrain them from dealing with the petition mentioned property in respect of their shares. The petitioner herein has not arrayed the other members of the branch to which Singaravelan (R3) belongs. I would go to the extent of remarking that the other members of the branch can even deal with their undivided share.
It appears that no partition had been effected in Singaravelan's branch. Therefore, the other members of the branch cannot effect any alienation with definite boundaries. I do not find any ground to grant relief. The Writ Petition is dismissed. The attachment order obtained by the writ petitioner can be enforced only against Singaravelan (R3) and not against anybody else. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
13.11.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No rmi 4/6
To 1.The District Registrar, Trichirappalli District, Cantonment, Trichirappalli.
2.The Sub Registrar, Kattuputhur Sub-Registration Office, Kattuputhur, Trichirappalli District.
5/6
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
rmi 13.11.2025 6/6