S.Elumalai vs The Sub-Registrar
2021 Latest Caselaw 10872 Mad

                                                                              W.P.No.6247 of 2021

                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                    DATED : 28.04.2021

                                                        CORAM :

                             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN

                                            Writ Petition No.6247 of 2021


                    S.Elumalai,
                    S/o. Seenuvasan                                           ...   Petitioner

                                                             -Vs-

                    The Sub-Registrar,
                    Rishivanthiyam Sub-Registrar Office,
                    Sankarapuram Taluk,
                    Kallakurichi Dt.                                          ... Respondent

                    Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
                    praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the
                    records and quash the impugned non-speaking order in Refusal No.RFL/
                    Rishivandhyam/54/2020 dated 04.12.2020 of the respondent as illegal and
                    consequently direct the respondent to register family settlement deed dated
                    01.12.2020 executed by petitioner in favour of his son Kathiravan in
                    TN.No.97821250/2020 dated 04.12.2020.


                                   For Petitioner      :     Mr.T.Arunkumar

                                   For Respondent       :    Mr.T.M.Pappiah,
                                                             Special Government Pleader

                    1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                   W.P.No.6247 of 2021


                                                         ORDER

(This case has been heard through video conference)

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the

respondent refusing to register the settlement deed submitted by the

petitioner on the ground that in the decree under which he is claiming right,

no share has been allotted to him, that apart, no parent document was

produced to prove his title.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that, the petitioner has half share

in the schedule property. Earlier, the petitioner's father one Srinivasan

claiming exclusive right over the property, filed a suit in O.S.No.963 of

2008 on the file of District Munsif Court, Kallakurichi, wherein the

petitioner was impleaded as 1st defendant. The above suit has been

dismissed by the learned judge, by Judgment and decree dated 09.04.2008,

wherein the trial court has clearly held that the petitioner, who was arrayed

as 1st defendant, has half of share in the suit schedule property. Thereafter,

the appeal filed by the petitioner's father in A.S.No.24 of 2008, on the file

of Sub-Court, Kallakurichi dated 12.01.2015, was also dismissed. Even

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.P.No.6247 of 2021

though the petitioner has produced all the documents before the

Respondent, without considering the same, the respondent refused to

register the document on the ground that, he has no right or title over the

property.

3. The learned counsel appearing for petitioner would submit that the

property is a joint family property, wherein the petitioner has half share.

Earlier, the petitioner's father claiming exclusive right over the property,

filed a suit, that has been dismissed, and the Trial Court has clearly held

that the petitioner has half share in the suit schedule property and the appeal

filed by the petitioner's father was also dismissed in the year 2015, and the

Judgment and decree passed by the trial court has become final. Without

considering the same, the respondent refused to register the document.

4.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for respondent,

on instructions, would submit that, the petitioner failed to produce any

document to show his title, hence, the respondent refused to register the

document.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.P.No.6247 of 2021

5. I have considered rival submissions and perused the records

carefully.

6. The only ground on which the respondent has refused to register

the document is that, in the judgment and decree passed by the trial court,

there is no specific finding that the petitioner has a share in the property.

On perusal of judgment and decree passed by the District Munsif Court,

Kallakurichi, in para 32, it has been clearly stated that the petitioner is

entitled for half share in the property and dismissed the suit filed by the

petitioner's father claiming exclusive right over the property. It is a

contested decree and it is stated that the appeal filed by his father was also

dismissed for default, and so far, it was not restored.

7. Considering all those circumstances, the finding of the trial court

clearly shows that the petitioner has half of share in the suit schedule

property and the petitioner is only executing settlement deed in respect of

his half share, the respondent cannot refuse to register the document on the

ground that no share has been allotted to the petitioner. In the said

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.P.No.6247 of 2021

circumstances, the order passed by the respondent is set aside and the

respondent is directed to register the document, if the document is

otherwise in order, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt

of the copy of this order. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands allowed.

No costs.

28.04.2021

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No rpp

To The Sub-Registrar, Rishivanthiyam Sub-Registrar Office, Sankarapuram Taluk, Kallakurichi Dt.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.P.No.6247 of 2021

V. BHARATHIDASAN, J.

rpp

W.P.No.6247 of 2021

28.04.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/