Madras High Court
N.Maheswaran vs The Inspector General Of ... on 19 January, 2022
W.P.No.22019 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.01.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
W.P.No. 22019 of 2021
and
W.M.P.Nos.23242 & 23244 of 2021
N.Maheswaran .... Petitioner
Vs
1. The Inspector General of Registration,
Santhome High Road,
Chennai – 600 004.
2. The Sub Registrar,
Arakonam,
Tamil Nadu – 631 001.
3. N. Jeevalakshmi
4. N.Yuvaneswari .... Respondents
Prayer :- Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the
records relating to unilateral cancellation of Settlement Deed in
Cancellation Deed document No.2679/2015 dated 13.05.2015 on the file
of the second respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the
first and second respondents to remove the encumbrance entries of the
unilateral cancellation of Settlement Deed in document No.3524 of 2009,
dated 08.04.2009 and the subsequent execution of WILL in document
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
W.P.No.22019 of 2021
No.44 of 2015, dated 13.05.2015 from the Encumbrance entries
maintained in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Arakonam in connection
with the land and building bearing Door No.7/5, Srinivasan Street,
Stuartpet, Arakonam Town and Taluk, Vellore District, comprised in
survey No.207/9, T.S.No.60, Ward “B”, Block-15 measuring an extent of
1260 sq.ft. within time stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Vargees Amal Raja
For R1 & R2 : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan
Government Advocate
For R3 : Mr.Ajay Kumar
for Mr.T.V.Vineeth Kumar
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of writ of
certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records relating to unilateral
cancellation of Settlement Deed in Cancellation Deed document
No.2679/2015 dated 13.05.2015 on the file of the second respondent ;
quash the same and consequently direct the first and second respondents
to remove the encumbrance entries of the unilateral cancellation of
Settlement Deed in document No.3524 of 2009, dated 08.04.2009 and
the subsequent execution of WILL in document No.44 of 2015, dated
13.05.2015 from the Encumbrance entries maintained in the office of the
Sub-Registrar, Arakonam in connection with the land and building
bearing Door No.7/5, Srinivasan Street, Stuartpet, Arakonam Town and
Taluk, Vellore District, comprised in survey No.207/9, T.S.No.60, Ward
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.22019 of 2021
“B”, Block-15 measuring an extent of 1260 sq.ft. within time stipulated
by this Court.
2. Heard, Mr.V.Vargees Amal Raja, learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner, Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Government Advocate
appearing for the respondents 1 & 2 and Mr.Ajay Kumar, learned counsel
appearing for the third respondent.
3. The case of the petitioner is that the property, comprised in
survey No.207/9, T.S.No.60, Ward “B”, Block- 15, to an extent of 1260
sq.ft. bearing Door No.7/5, Srinivasan Street, Stuartpet, Arakonam Town
and Taluk, Vellore District, owned by the petitioner's father
S.P.Nagarajan. He settled the subject property in favour of the petitioner
as irrevocable deed of Settlement dated 08.04.2009 registered vide
document No.3524 of 2009 on the file of the second respondent. After
execution of the Settlement Deed, the settlor expired on 05.07.2021.
After his demise, the petitioner came to know that the settlement deed
dated 08.04.2009 executed by his father was cancelled by way of
unilateral cancellation deed of settlement dated 13.05.2015 vide
document No.2679 of 2015. On the same day, the Will dated 13.05.2015
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.22019 of 2021
was executed by his father in favour of the petitioner and the respondents
3 and 4 herein in respect of the same property registered as document
No.44 of 2015.
4. The second respondent has no power to register the
unilateral cancellation of deed of settlement without any notice and
without knowledge of the petitioner herein i.e., the settlee. In this regard,
the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgments reported
in 2014 (3) CTC 113 in the case of D.V.Loganathan Vs. The Sub
Registrar, Pallavaram, Chennai and another and 2012 (1) MLJ 216 in
the case of K.A.Shanmugam and another Vs. Tamilarasi and others.
5. In the result, the writ petition stands allowed. However,
the third and fourth respondents are at liberty to approach the Civil
Court. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No
costs.
19.01.2022
Lpp
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
To
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.22019 of 2021
1. The Inspector General of Registration,
Santhome High Road,
Chennai – 600 004.
2. The Sub Registrar,
Arakonam,
Tamil Nadu – 631 001.
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.22019 of 2021
Lpp
W.P.No.22019 of 2021
19.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
