Annadurai v. The Sub Registrar

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY Annadurai

...Petitioner

vs.

1.The Sub-Registrar, Thiruvonam Sub-Registrar Office, 2.Tamilarasan

...Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the impugned rejection order in Na.Ka.No.387/2025, dated 08.10.2025 passed by the first respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to accept and consider the petitioner's objection relating to S.No. 172/12 situated in Kaduvettividuthy Village, Thiruvonam Taluk, Thanjavur District.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Eashwar For Respondents : Mr.M.Lingadurai, Special Government Pleader for R1

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned rejection order of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.387/2025, dated 08.10.2025 and to 1/4

direct the first respondent to accept and consider the petitioner's objection relating to S.No.172/12, Kaduvettividuthy Village, Thiruvonam Taluk,

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, in the present case, since the second respondent intends to alienate the subject property, the petitioner has given a protest petition before the first respondent. However, without conducting any enquiry, the first respondent has rejected the petitioner's objection. Hence, the Writ Petition.

3. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent would submit that the petitioner sought for interim injunction from the first respondent based on the representation submitted by him. He would submit that granting injunction is beyond the jurisdiction of the first respondent. In the event, the petitioner intends to restrain the second respondent from registering any document in respect of the subject property, the petitioner has to approach the Civil Court and obtain an order of injunction. Thereafter, the first respondent will record the same and forbear from registering any document presented for registration by the second respondent in respect of the subject property. 2/4

4. Upon hearing both sides, I find force in the submissions of the learned Special Government Pleader for the first respondent. As rightly contended by him, if at all the second respondent has to be restrained from registering any document in respect of the subject property, the petitioner is supposed to approach the Civil Court and obtain an order of injunction. Treating the first respondent as a Civil Court to get an order of injunction there is not permissible in law. Hence, there is no merit in the Writ Petition and it is liable to be dismissed. It is up to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court for appropriate remedy.

5. Accordingly this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. 18.12.2025 (2/2) Speaking / Non-speaking order Index : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No mbi To The Sub-Registrar, Thiruvonam Sub-Registrar Office, 3/4

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

mbi 18.12.2025 (2/2) 4/4