A.Arunkumar vs The Deputy Inspector General ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 9512 Mad

                                                                         W.P.(MD).No.789 of 2021


                            BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                 DATED : 15.04.2021

                                                      CORAM :

                              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

                                              W.P.(MD)No.789 of 2021


                     A.Arunkumar                                       ...Petitioner

                                                          Vs.


                     1.The Deputy Inspector General (Registration)
                       Integrated Registration Department Complex,
                       TNUA Nagar,
                       Rajakambeeram,
                       Y.Othakkadai,
                       Madurai - 625107.

                     2.The District Registrar (Administration)
                       TNUA Nagar,
                       Rajakambeeram,
                       Y.Othakkadai,
                       Madurai - 625107.

                     3.Madurai North Joint -1 Sub Registrar,
                       Madurai North,
                       Madurai.

                     4.Ponnusamy                                       ... Respondents




                     1/8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                   W.P.(MD).No.789 of 2021


                     Prayer: This Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to
                     issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing respondents No.1 to 3 to conduct
                     enquiry with regard to cancellation of 11 sale deeds and subsequent deeds
                     relating to 11 sale deeds of scheduled property situated in S.No.1/1 of
                     Kanchirankulam Village, Thirupuvanam Taluk, Sivagangai District, on the
                     basis of the petitioner's representation dated 19.11.2020.
                                   (Prayer amended vide Court order, dated 15.04.2021
                                               in WMP(MD)No.3329/2021)


                                   For Petitioner                  : Mr.M.Sankar

                                   For Respondents 1 to 3          : Mr.K.Sathiya Singh
                                                                   Additional Government Pleader


                                                           ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed for a direction to the

respondents to conduct an enquiry based on the representation made by the

petitioner on 19.11.2020, wherein, the petitioner has sought for the

cancellation of 17 sale deeds and two General Power of Attorney documents

pertaining to the subject property.

2. The case of the petitioner is that originally the property was

situated in survey No.1/1 and it had a total extent of 3 acres and 27 cents.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.P.(MD).No.789 of 2021

The further case of the petitioner is that the property in question was an

ancestral property and a share came to be allotted in favour of one

Neelamegam and after his demise, his three sons inherited 1 acre and 9 cents.

One of the sons name is Ponnusamy, who is the fourth respondent in this Writ

Petition.

3.According to the petitioner, the fourth respondent got the patta

transferred in his name for the entire property and he sold the property in

favour of 11 persons by virtue of 11 sale deeds in the year 1983, 1984 and

2007. Subsequently, the persons who purchased the property also executed

sale deeds and Power of Attorney documents.

4.According to the petitioner, based on the objections given by

one of the legal heirs, the patta that was exclusively given in the name of the

fourth respondent was cancelled by the Revenue Divisional Officer by

proceedings, dated 27.05.2008 and a joint patta was issued in favour of all the

legal heirs. This order was also confirmed subsequently by the District

Revenue Officer by proceedings, dated 24.09.2009.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.P.(MD).No.789 of 2021

5.The petitioner came into the picture in the year 2013, when he

purchased the subject property from the other legal heirs by virtue of a

registered sale deed, dated 16.09.2013. According to the petitioner, he was

not aware about the earlier sale deeds referred herein above and he came to

know about it subsequently, only after verifying the encumbrance certificate.

Therefore, the petitioner made a representation to the respondents 1 to 3 on

19.11.2020, to conduct an enquiry and to cancel the registered documents

executed by the fourth respondent and subsequent buyers. Since the same

was not considered, the present Writ Petition has been filed before this Court,

seeking for appropriate direction.

6. Heard Mr.M.Sankar, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and Mr.K.Sathyasingh, learned Additional Government Pleader

appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3.

7.The relief sought for by the petitioner in his representation

dated 19.11.2020, is for the cancellation of the registered documents. The

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment in Satyapal Anand Vs. State of

Madhya Pradesh and others reported in 2016 (10) SCC - 767, has

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.P.(MD).No.789 of 2021

categorically held that the Registration Department does not have the power

to recall or cancel a registered document. The Hon'ble Supreme Court made

it clear that the parties will have to agitate their rights only before a

competent Civil Court and such cancellation of documents can be done only

by a Civil Court. Pursuant to the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme

Court, the Inspector General of Registration also issued a circular to the

effect that any representation made for the cancellation of a registered

document should not be entertained and parties must be relegated before the

Civil Court and pursuant to this circular, the earlier circular was also

withdrawn.

8.In view of the above settled law, the relief sought for by the

petitioner cannot be granted by this Court. The learned counsel for the

petitioner was insisting that atleast the respondents must be directed to

conduct an enquiry. This submission made by the learned counsel for the

petitioner cannot be entertained, since, the enquiry is not going to result in

the cancellation of the documents. Therefore, merely conducting an enquiry

will be a wasteful exercise and the petitioner will not be able to get any relief.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.P.(MD).No.789 of 2021

9.The petitioner, if aggrieved by the sale deeds executed by the

fourth respondent and the subsequent documents executed by the subsequent

purchasers, should question the same only before a competent Civil Court, if

so advised and if it is permissible in law. Except giving this liberty, no

further orders can be passed in this Writ Petition.

10. This Writ Petition stands disposed of, accordingly, No costs.

15.04.2021 Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No rm

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.P.(MD).No.789 of 2021

To

1.The Deputy Inspector General (Registration) Integrated Registration Department Complex, TNUA Nagar, Rajakambeeram, Y.Othakkadai, Madurai - 625107.

2.The District Registrar (Administration) TNUA Nagar, Rajakambeeram, Y.Othakkadai, Madurai - 625107.

3.Madurai North Joint -1 Sub Registrar, Madurai North, Madurai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.P.(MD).No.789 of 2021

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

rm

W.P.(MD).No.789 of 2021 (2/2)

15.04.2021

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