Madras High Court
S. Pichai vs The District Registrar on 29 July, 2021
W.A.(MD) No.1489 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 29.07.2021
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD) No.1489 of 2021
1. S. Pichai
2. P. Murugeshwari
.. Appellants
Vs.
1. The District Registrar,
District Registrar Office,
Butlagundu Road, Periyakulam,
Theni.
2. The Sub Registrar,
Sub Registrar Office,
Cumbum,
Theni.
3. S. Murugesan
4. M. Jeyakumar
5. K. Jegathesan
6. K.B. Elangkannan
7. R. Ilamparathi
8. A.K.N. Vaijeyanthimala
.. Respondents
__________
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD) No.1489 of 2021
Prayer: Appeal filed against the order dated 18.02.2021 passed in
W.M.P.No.2421 of 2021 in W.P.(MD) SR.No.7302 of 2021.
For Appellants : Mr. V. Vishnu
For Respondents : Mr. A.K. Manikkam
Standing Counsel for Governement
For R1 and R2
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by
The Hon'ble Chief Justice]
This is another frivolous appeal filed, possibly, to avoid the
liability to a secured creditor or a bank.
2. The appellants complain that their formal application to jointly
file a single petition was taken up by the Writ Court and the petition
dealt with on merits at such stage without allowing the matter to
progress any further.
3. The reasons for adopting the procedure complained of is
apparent from the order impugned dated February 18, 2021. It is a
matter of concern that the filter that was traditionally maintained at
the Bar may no longer be in place so that audacious and utterly
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD) No.1489 of 2021
frivolous claims reach the Court without any degree of care or caution
being exercised at the Bar to weed out the completely unworthy
matters.
4. The impugned order records that the case of the appellants
herein was that they had obtained an agricultural loan from the State
Bank of India, ADM Kumbam Branch, by mortgaging their agricultural
properties. The appellants referred to a notice received from the Debts
Recovery Tribunal, Madurai for recovery of an amount in excess of Rs.
19 Lakh with interest. According to the appellants, a one-time
settlement offer had been made by the bank and the appellants had
paid in accordance therewith and the loan stood discharged. The
appellants complained of some documents being fraudulently
registered and the prayer before the Writ Court was to declare certain
deeds as null and void.
5. Apart from the Writ Court finding the averments in the
affidavit to be “completely jumbled up and disjoined” and the matter
being beyond comprehension in how it had been presented, the Court
noticed that a bald case of fraud had been made out to challenge the
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD) No.1489 of 2021
ownership of properties by others.
6. It is a matter of concern that the noble profession that it was
once called may now have been reduced by some practitioners to a
mere trade or even worse. Oftentimes, instead of appropriate advice
being given to a client, devices are chalked out to aid the client that
may even border on abetting. These are areas of concern that need to
be addressed by the disciplining authority, provided such authority was
disciplined itself.
7. It is elementary that when a deed is challenged, whether on
the ground of forgery or fabrication or fraud, particulars of the forgery
or fraud need to be pleaded; and, in sufficient clarity. Secondly, the
challenge to a deed, as in the present case, amounts to the challenge
to the title of the holder of an immovable property. It is elementary
that questions of title are not gone into in the writ jurisdiction, which is
primarily a remedy available in the public law field. In any event,
issues as to fraud and forgery cannot be decided on affidavit evidence
in summary proceedings and writ petitions are, generally, decided in
such manner and without recording any evidence.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD) No.1489 of 2021
8. More importantly, a challenge of such kind has to be carried to
a civil court upon payment of due court fees for the reliefs claimed.
The writ petition was nothing more than a kite-flying exercise to put
another person’s title in cloud to obtain an undue advantage.
9. For the reasons aforesaid, W.A.(MD) No.1489 of 2021 is
dismissed. The appellants will pay costs assessed at Rs.20,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Thousand only) to the respondents in equal measure,
and the respondents will be entitled to initiate appropriate proceedings
to obtain Rs.2,500/- (Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred only) each
from the appellants together with interest at the rate of ten percent
per annum if the costs are not tendered within three months from
date.
10. It may also be time for advocate for the appellants to
introspect.
(S.B., CJ.) (S.A.I., J.)
29.07.2021
Index : yes/no
mnr
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD) No.1489 of 2021
To:
1. The District Registrar,
District Registrar Office,
Butlagundu Road, Periyakulam,
Theni.
2. The Sub Registrar,
Sub Registrar Office,
Cumbum,
Theni.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD) No.1489 of 2021
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
S.ANANTHI, J.
(mnr)
W.A.(MD) No.1489 of 2021
29.07.2021
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
