Madras High Court
R.Joy Christal vs Lt.Col.R.John Daniel on 17 August, 2023
W.A.No.483 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17.08.2023
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI
W.A.No.483 of 2020
1. R.Joy Christal
2. R.Metildamary
3. R.Victoria Angeline
4. R.Lizzy Jenika Dorathy
5. M.Jaganathan
6. Nirmala Devi
D/o M.Jaganathan
7. Indhira Gandhi
D/o M.Jaganthan .. Appellants
v.
1. Lt.Col.R.John Daniel
2. The District Registrar
Registration Department
Udhagamandalam
The Nilgiris District
3. The Sub Registrar
Gudalur
The Nilgiris District .. Respondents
____________
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.483 of 2020
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the
order dated 03.03.2020 made in W.P.No.1698 of 2017.
For Appellants :: Mr.V.Karthikeyan
For Respondents :: Mr.T.M.Naveen for R1
Mr.K.Tippusulthan
Government Advocate for R2 & R3
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by D.KRISHNAKUMAR,J.)
This intra-Court appeal is directed against the order dated 03.03.2020
passed in Writ Petition No.1698 of 2017.
2. The first respondent herein filed the above writ petition
challenging the action of the third respondent herein for registration of the
unilateral cancellation of settlement deed dated 18.5.2015 executed and
presented by Raichel Mary, the mother of the first respondent as Document
No.956 of 2015 on 20.8.2015. It is the case of the first respondent that his
mother executed a settlement deed dated 24.10.2014 in his favour, which
was registered as Document No.1406 of 2014 on the file of the third
respondent. Even prior to the execution of the said settlement deed dated
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.483 of 2020
24.10.2014, the appellants 1 to 4 and their sister R.Beaulah Gnanammal had
executed a certificate dated 30.11.1993 in the presence of the Executive
Officer of Gudalur Town Panchayat conveying their no objection for
Raichel Mary executing a gift settlement deed in favour of the first
respondent in respect of the property in question. The revenue records also
have been mutated in the name of the first respondent. Subsequently, the
first respondent also leased out the property on 1.2.2015. According to the
first respondent, the said settlement deed was duly acted upon. While that
being so, his mother Raichel Mary executed another document dated
18.5.2015 settling the very same property in favour of her daughters,
namely, the appellants 1 to 4 and their sister R.Beaulah Gnanammal, which
was unilaterally registered as Document No.956 of 2015 on 20.8.2015 by
the third respondent. Pending the writ petition, since R.Beulah Gnanammal
died, her legal heirs were impleaded as the appellants 5 to 7 herein.
Challenging the said unilateral cancellation, the first respondent filed the
writ petition. The writ Court, following the decision of the Full Bench of
this Court in the case of Latif Estate Line India Limited v. Hadeeja
Ammal, 2011 (2) CTC 1, allowed the writ petition holding that the
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.483 of 2020
unilateral cancellation deed and the subsequent settlement deed both dated
18.5.2015 in favour of the appellants have to be declared as null and void
with a further direction to the third respondent to delete the said entries
from the register as well as from the encumbrance certificate with liberty to
the appellants herein to approach the competent civil Court for necessary
relief. The said order of the writ Court is under challenge in this intra-Court
appeal.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the
order passed by the writ Court declaring the cancellation of the settlement
deed as null and void, is unsustainable in law and therefore the order of the
writ Court is liable to be set aside.
4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the
respondents 2 & 3, producing the copies of the cancellation order passed by
the registering authority and the extract of the encumbrance certificate dated
10.8.2023, submitted that pursuant to the order passed by the writ Court, the
registering authority, namely, the Sub Registrar, Gudalur has cancelled the
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.483 of 2020
unilateral settlement deed executed in favour of the appellants and the same
has also been reflected in the extract of the encumbrance certificate dated
10.8.2023. Therefore, at this juncture, the appellants, as observed by the
writ Court, have to seek remedy only before the competent civil Court for
necessary relief. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent also
adopted the arguments of the learned Government Advocate and prayed for
dismissal of the writ appeal.
5. We also find merits on the submissions made by the learned
counsels appearing for the respondents. In our considered opinion, the writ
Court, following the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of
Latif Estate Line India Limited v. Hadeeja Ammal, 2011 (2) CTC 1,
finding that the settlement deed dated 24.10.2014 executed by Raichel
Mary, the mother of the first respondent in his favour has been unilaterally
cancelled by the subsequent settlement deed dated 18.5.2015 at the instance
of the appellants, which was also wrongly entertained by the third
respondent and registered as Document No.956 of 2015 on 20.8.2015, has
rightly allowed the writ petition filed by the first respondent and has
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.483 of 2020
declared the gift settlement deed dated 18.5.2015 as null and void and has
also correctly directed the third respondent to delete the said entries from
the register as well as from the encumbrance certificate. A perusal of the
copies of the cancellation order and the extract of the encumbrance
certificate dated 10.8.2023 produced by the learned Government Advocate
also would show that based upon the order passed by the writ Court, the
registering authority has cancelled the entry in regard to unilateral
registration of the document dated 20.8.2015 from the register and the same
has also been reflected in the encumbrance certificate. When the order of
the writ Court has been duly acted upon and this Court is also convinced
with the materials placed before this Court by the respondents, the writ
appeal stands dismissed with liberty to the appellants to approach the
competent civil Court for appropriate relief, if any, as observed by the writ
Court. Consequently, C.M.P.No.7295 of 2020 is also dismissed. There shall
be no order as to costs.
(D.K.K.,J.) (P.B.B,J.)
Index : yes/no 17.08.2023
Neutral citation : yes/no
ss
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.483 of 2020
To
1. The District Registrar
Registration Department
Udhagamandalam
The Nilgiris District
2. The Sub Registrar
Gudalur
The Nilgiris District
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.483 of 2020
D.KRISHNAKUMAR,J.
AND
P.B.BALAJI,J.
ss
W.A.No.483 of 2020
17.08.2023
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
