Madras High Court
Sureshbabu vs The Inspector General Of ... on 13 April, 2022
W.P.(MD).No.6969 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 13.04.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
W.P.(MD).No.6969 of 2022
and
W.M.P.(MD).No.5323 of 2022
Sureshbabu ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
Office of the Inspector General of Registration,
Chennai – 600028.
2.The District Registrar,
Office of the District Registrar,
Virudhunagar District.
3.The Sub Registrar,
Sub Registrar Office,
Veeracholan Taluk,
Virudhunagar District.
4.Nodal Officer,
Retired Justice R.M.Lodha Committee,
SEBI Bhavan, BKC,
Plot No.C4-A, 'G' Block,
Bandra-Kurla Complex,
Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051. ...Respondents
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.6969 of 2022
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records of the impugned encumbrance made by the third respondent office in
the petitioner's own proper purchased land in Survey No.116 to an extent of 7
acres and 43 cents in the Pudukottai Revenue Village, Manamadurai Taluk,
Sivagangai District in the name of the fourth respondent without any legal
rights for the same land in violation of the natural justice vide:18/2020, dated
17.10.2020 and set aside the same and consequently direct to allow further
future encumbrance in the same land by petitioner as his legal right in the third
respondent office within a stipulated time that may be fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Senthil Kumar
for Mr.D.Ajayepriyan
For R-1 to R-3 : Mr.S.Shanmugavel,
Additional Government Pleader.
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned encumbrance
made by the third respondent in the petitioner's property comprised in Survey
No.116 measuring an extent of 7 acres and 43 cents situated at Pudukottai
Revenue Village, Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai District in the name of the
fourth respondent on 17.10.2020.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.6969 of 2022
2. According to the petitioner, he is the absolute owner of the
aforementioned property. According to him, the District Munsif Court,
Manamadurai in O.S.No.130 of 2011 by its judgment and decree dated
12.03.2012 declared the sale deed dated 19.01.2006 executed in favour of
Santheef Ravoth as null and void and directed the Registration Department to
remove the encumbrance. According to the petitioner, the fourth respondent is
claiming rights only based on the sale deed dated 19.01.2006 standing in the
name of Santheef Ravoth, which has already been declared to be null and void
by the District Munsif Court, Manamadurai, as referred to supra.
3. According to the petitioner, though the sale deed dated 19.01.2006
standing in the name of Santheef Ravoth has been declared as null and void,
encumbrance is still reflected in the encumbrance certificate with regard to the
said document on 17.10.2020 vide Document No.18 of 2020. The petitioner
has given a representation on 01.04.2022 to the fourth respondent calling upon
them to remove the encumbrance bearing Document No.18 of 2020 dated
17.10.2020.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.6969 of 2022
4. Though the petitioner has challenged the encumbrance vide Document
No.18 of 2020 dated 17.10.2020 in this Writ Petition, at this stage, this Court
cannot grant the same without hearing the fourth respondent. The only relief
that can be granted by this Court is to direct the second and third respondents to
consider the petitioner's representation seeking for removal of the encumbrance
vide Document No.18 of 2020 dated 17.10.2020. Learned counsel for the
petitioner has also agreed for the same.
5. However, as seen from the representation given earlier, the petitioner
has given a representation only to the fourth respondent. Hence, he has to give
a fresh representation to the second and third respondents for which the learned
counsel for the petitioner agrees.
6. After recording the submissions made by the respective counsels and
in view of the fact that no notice was given to the petitioner prior to recording
the encumbrance, as stated supra, this Court directs the petitioner to submit a
fresh representation to the second and third respondents requesting them to
remove the encumbrance made by the third respondent in the property
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.6969 of 2022
comprised in Survey No.116 measuring an extent of 7 acres and 43 cents
situated at Pudukottai Revenue Village, Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai
District in the name of the fourth respondent vide Document No.18 of 2020
dated 17.10.2020. On receipt of the said representation, the second and third
respondents are directed to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with
law, after affording a fair hearing to the petitioner and the fourth respondent
including granting them the right of personal hearing, within a period of four
(4) months thereafter. The petitioner is permitted to produce all the relevant
documents/records/Court proceedings before the second and third respondents
to substantiate his case.
7. With the aforesaid direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There
shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition
stands closed.
13.04.2022
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
Lm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.6969 of 2022
To
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
Office of the Inspector General of Registration,
Chennai – 600028.
2.The District Registrar,
Office of the District Registrar,
Virudhunagar District.
3.The Sub Registrar,
Sub Registrar Office,
Veeracholan Taluk,
Virudhunagar District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.6969 of 2022
ABDUL QUDDHOSE,J.
Lm
W.P.(MD).No.6969 of 2022
13.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
