Madras High Court
K.S.Shivakumaran vs The Inspector General Of ... on 21 June, 2021
W.A.No.1466 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.06.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
W.A.No.1466 of 2021
K.S.Shivakumaran ... Appellant
Vs.
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
Department of Registration,
No.100, Santhome High Road,
Chennai - 600 028.
2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration,
Office of the DIG Registration,
Near DSP Rountana,
Velapati,
Vellore – 632 001.
3.The District Registrar,
Office of District Registrar,
Cheyyar, 604 407,
Thiruvannamalai District.
4.The Sub Registrar,
Registrar Office,
Arani – 632 301,
Thiruvannamalai District. ... Respondents
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.1466 of 2021
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under clause 15 of Letter Patents Act, filed praying
to set aside the final order dated 11.11.2020 in W.P.No.15861 of 2020 passed
by the learned Single Judge.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Karthik
For Respondents : Mr.C.Jayaprakash
Government Advocate
JUDGMENT
(delivered by MRS.PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA.J.,)
The writ petitioner in W.P.No/15861 of 2010 is the appellant herein,
challenging the order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court, refusing
to issue a writ of mandamus, as sought for therein.
2. The writ petitioner filed the writ petition, seeking a direction to the
respondents 1 and 2 to conduct an enquiry against the Sub Registrar, Arni /
fourth respondent herein in respect of Document No.25/15, which has been
registered on the file of the fourth respondent.
3. The allegation of the appellant is that the fourth respondent had
committed certain irregularities in respect of the document, submitted by him
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.1466 of 2021
for registration. It is also alleged by the appellant that the fourth respondent /
Sub Registrar had made some mutation in the records without verifying the
documents. The appellant also seems to have filed a criminal complaint, lodged
with Thiruvannamalai Police Station in the year 2018.
4. The appellant has also filed a civil suit in O.S.No.210 of 2013 against
the defendants therein as well as the Indian Bank, Vellore for declaration of his
title over the agricultural lands, which he has purchased in the year 1991 and
has also sought for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from
interfering with his possession. The fourth respondent / Sub Registrar has also
been impleaded in the suit by order dated 29.04.2014 in I.A.No.252 of 2014.
He filed another suit in O.S.No.50 of 2019 before the District Munsif, Arni
along with injunction petition and obtained an order of injunction on
22.04.2019 in I.A.No.207 of 2019.
5. It is stated by the appellant that in the same registration number, two
more documents have been filed before the fourth respondent. However, he is
unable to say what was the said two documents. Though the learned counsel for
the appellant would state that he wants only clarification from the Sub
Registrar / fourth respondent, he is unable to explain as to what is the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.1466 of 2021
clarification he has sought for. The appellant also moved the Civil Court,
making the fourth respondent as a party. He cannot avail extraordinary
jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking
a mandamus to direct him to give clarification. The appellant himself is not
clear about what clarification he wants.
6. As the appellant already filed two civil suits, which are pending and
ripe for trial, it is open to him to work out his remedy and get appropriate relief
whatever he has sought for.
7. Learned Single Judge also found that the appellant having moved
Civil Court and made criminal complaint against the fourth respondent, he will
not be entitled to get a direction from a writ Court in order to settle his
personal scores with the fourth respondent.
8. Thus, the learned Single Judge has rightly dismissed the writ petition
and there is no bona fide in the claim of the writ petitioner. Therefore, we find
that there is no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the learned Single
Judge.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.1466 of 2021
9. The writ appeal is dismissed as devoid of merits. No costs. The order
passed by us or by the learned Single Judge will not, in any way, influence the
disposal of the suits on merits.
(P.S.N.J.,) (K.R.J.,)
21.06.2021
sr/rst
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
To:
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
Department of Registration,
No.100, Santhome High Road,
Chennai - 600 028.
2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration,
Office of the DIG Registration,
Near DSP Rountana,
Velapati, Vellore – 632 001.
3.The District Registrar,
Office of District Registrar,
Cheyyar, 604 407,
Thiruvannamalai District.
4.The Sub Registrar,
Registrar Office,
Arani – 632 301,
Thiruvannamalai District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.1466 of 2021
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA.J.,
AND
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J.,
sr/rst
W.A.No.1466 of 2021
21.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
