Madras High Court
R.Vijayan vs The Inspector General Of ... on 17 April, 2021
W.P.(MD)No.7944 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 17.04.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.(MD)No.7944 of 2021
and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.6053 & 6054 of 2021
R.Vijayan .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
Office of Registration Department,
No.100, Santhom High Road,
Mullima Nagar, Mandavellipakam,
Annamalaipuram,
Chennai.
2.The Deputy-Inspector General of Registration,
Office of DIG of Registration Department,
Court Campus,
Cantonment, Trichy.
3.The District Revenue Officer,
Karur District,
Karur.
4.The District Registrar,
Office of District Registrar of Registration,
Collectorate, Karur District.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.7944 of 2021
5.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Kulithalai Division,
Karur District.
6.The Tahsildar,
Kandavur Taluk,
Karur District.
7.The Sub-Registrar,
Sub-Registrar Office,
Tharagampatti Sub-Registrar Office,
Karur District.
8.Saravanakumar
9.Bharathmani
10.Santhi
11.Selvam
12.Sathishkumar
13.Minor. Nithiyashiri
14.Minor. Mathumitha
15.Minor. Manisha
The 11th respondent is guardian for the
respondents 13 to 15
16.Manoharan
17.Minor. Salika
18.Minor. Shri Haribala
The 16th respondent is guardian for the
respondents 17 & 18
19.Lakshmi
20.Jeeva
21.Palanivel .. Respondents
2/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.7944 of 2021
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records
pursuant to the impugned sale deed in Doc.No.667 of 2018 dated
10.04.2018 on the file of the 7th respondent pertaining to S.F.Nos.381/2B1
& 381/3A, situated at east village, Kadavoor Taluk, Karur District executed
by the respondents 8 to 20 in favour of the 21 st respondent and quash the
same consequently direct the 7th respondent to remove the entry of sale
deed in Doc.No.667 of 2018 in the records.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Gokulraj
For Respondent : Mr.K.Sathiyasingh,
Additional Government Pleader.
*****
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the sale deed registered
on the file of the seventh respondent on 10.04.2018, as Document No.667
of 2018 and for a consequential direction to the seventh respondent to
remove the entry made in the records while registering the document.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the owner of the
subject property and respondents 8 to 20 had obtained a patta for the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.7944 of 2021
property without the knowledge of the petitioner. Immediately, thereafter
they executed the impugned sale deed dated 10.04.2018 in favour of the 21st
respondent. The further case of the petitioner is that he filed a revision
before the third respondent challenging the order passed by the 5 th
respondent and the revision was allowed by an order dated 21.01.2021.
Hence, according to the petitioner, the sale deed that was executed during
the interregnum period is illegal and has to be cancelled. Hence, this Writ
Petition has been filed before this Court.
3. Heard Mr.S.Gokulraj, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr.K.Sathiyasingh, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for
respondents 1 to 7.
4. In the considered view of this Court, the relief claimed by the
petitioner before this Court is un-sustainable. This Court cannot exercise
its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and cancel
sale deeds. Even insofar as the jurisdiction of the Registration Authority in
cancelling the sale deed is concerned, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has made
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.7944 of 2021
it very clear that such jurisdiction is not vested with the Registration
Authority. Useful reference can be made to the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Satya Pal Anand Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and
Others reported in (2016) 10 SCC 767. Following this judgment, a three
member Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has subsequently held that
writ is also not a remedy in cases of this nature. Useful reference can be
made to the judgment in Satya Pal Anand Vs. State of M.P. And Others
reported in 2017 (1) CTC 414.
5. In view of the above, this Court does not find any merits in this
Writ Petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. It is left open to the
petitioner to approach a competent civil Court and question the impugned
sale deed in the manner known to law. No costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed.
17.04.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
vsm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.7944 of 2021
In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19
Note : 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.
To
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
Office of Registration Department,
No.100, Santhom High Road,
Mullima Nagar, Mandavellipakam,
Annamalaipuram,
Chennai.
2.The Deputy-Inspector General of Registration,
Office of DIG of Registration Department,
Court Campus,
Cantonment, Trichy.
3.The District Revenue Officer,
Karur District,
Karur.
4.The District Registrar,
Office of District Registrar of Registration,
Collectorate, Karur District.
5.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Kulithalai Division,
Karur District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.7944 of 2021
6.The Tahsildar,
Kandavur Taluk,
Karur District.
7.The Sub-Registrar,
Sub-Registrar Office,
Tharagampatti Sub-Registrar Office,
Karur District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.7944 of 2021
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
vsm
W.P.(MD)No.7944 of 2021
and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.6053 & 6054 of 2021
17.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
