← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/33597/2025disposed of

N.Saraswathi v. The Sub Registrar,

2026-02-24Honourable Mr Justice Krishnan Ramasamy6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Date : 24/02/2026

CORAM

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice KRISHNAN RAMASAMY and WMP(MD) No.26512 and 26513 of 2025 N.Saraswathi ... Petitioner Vs The Sub Registrar,, Sub Registrar Office, Keeranur, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District..

... Respondent PRAYER :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS calling for the records relating to impugned order passed by the respondent in Refusal Check Slip No.RFL/Keeranur/55/2025 dated 29.10.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the respondent to register the exchange deed dated 29.10.2025 when it is presented for registration by the petitioner in respect of document mentioned properties.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Muthukamatchi For Respondent : Mr.K.R.Badurus Zaman Government Advocate 1/6

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the refusal check slip dated 29.10.2025 issued by the respondent and to direct the respondent to register the exchange deed dated 29.10.2025 presented by the petitioner for registration.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the official respondents.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that when the petitioner presented the exchange deed for registration, the same was refused by the respondent on the ground that the petitioner's land and the land, which is going to be exchanged are not adjacent lands. However, the learned counsel, by referring to the FMB sketch, which is found at Page No.36 of the typed set of papers, would submit that A Japtha of the property belong to the petitioner and B Japtha belongs to the exchange land holder. As far as A Japtha is concerned, it is situated in S.No.111/2 to an extent of 4.44 acres, it belongs to the petitioner and the exchange 2/6

land is in S.No.111/1 to an extent of 4.52 acres. The parties intend to exchange on the ground that they are adjacent to each other. However, without considering the said aspect, the refusal came to be made on the ground that the lands are not situated adjacently and situate at different places and different values. He would also submit that the guideline value is one and the same and for the extra portion of the land, which is going to be exchanged, ie., 0.8 cents, the petitioner is ready and willing to pay stamp duty. On these grounds, the learned counsel prays for interference.

5. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate would submit that since the lands are not adjacent lands and are situated at different places, the respondent has rightly rejected the same. However, he would submit that if the petitioner is ready and willing to pay the stamp duty for the excess land, it would be considered.

6. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record.

7. It appears that in the present case, the petitioner presented an exchange deed dated 29.10.2025, however, it came to be rejected citing the reason that the lands are not adjacent lands. However, from the 3/6

records, it is seen that the lands in A Japtha and B Japtha are adjacent to each other. Extent in A Japtha is 4.44 acres in S.No.111/2 and with regard to B Japtha, it is in S.No.111/1 and the extent is 4.52 acres and the parties intend to exchange the same. For the said excess portion of the land, ie., 0.8 cents, over and above the extent of land to be exchanged, the petitioner is ready and willing to pay the applicable stamp duty. In such circumstances, there is no impediment for the respondent to register the same. Accordingly, while setting aside the impugned order, the petitioner is directed to represent the exchange deed dated 29.10.2025 along with necessary stamp duty and upon such representation, the respondent shall register the same forthwith, if the same is otherwise in order.

8. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 24.02.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No RR 4/6

TO The Sub Registrar,, Sub Registrar Office, Keeranur, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District..

5/6

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J RR

ORDER

IN WP(MD) No.33597 of 2025 Date : 24/02/2026 6/6