Madras High Court
P.Mahadevan vs The District Registrar (Admin) on 6 October, 2023
W.P.(MD)No.17836 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 06.10.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.(MD)No.17836 of 2020
and
W.M.P.(MD).Nos.14873 of 2020 and 175 of 2021
P.Mahadevan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Registrar (Admin),
Madurai District, Mahal, Madurai
2.The Sub Registrar,
Tirupparankundram,
S.R.O., Madurai.
3.Chidambaram
4.Balasubramanian ...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the 2nd respondent
from registering any deed of conveyance presented by the respondents 3
and 4, their men and agents relating with the lands in S.Nos.16/5A, 16/5B
20/3A, 4/4A, 4/4B, 4/6, 13/4B, 13/5B, 15/1 and 13/6 in Nilayur II Bit,
Karuvelampatti, Madurai District, on the basis of exparte decree in
O.S.No.209/2015 on the file of the DMC, Tirumangalam.
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17836 of 2020
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Saravanakumar
For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.R.Ragavendran,
Government Advocate
For R-3 : Mr.T.Ponramkumar
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed for the issue of writ of
mandamus forbearing the second respondent from registering any
documents presented for registration by the third and fourth respondents
with respect to the subject property by taking advantage of the exparte
decree passed in O.S.No.209 of 2015 by the learned District Munsif,
Thirumangalam.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as
well as the learned Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1
and 2 and the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent.
3. The petitioner has sought for the present relief on the
misconception that an exparte decree cannot be considered as a valid
decree and it cannot be taken advantage of by the third and fourth
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17836 of 2020
respondents. This understanding by the petitioner is completely
misconceived. The exparte decree passed by a competent Civil Court is a
valid decree in the eye of law, till the same is set aside by the Court.
Useful reference can be made to Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of
Rajinder Kumar and Ors Vs. Shri Kuldeep Singh and Others reported in
(2014) 2 MLJ 496 (SC). In view of the same, till this exparte decree is set
aside in the manner known to law, for all purposes, the parties are bound
by the same.
4. In view of the above, the relief sought for by the petitioner
is un-sustainable and it cannot be granted by this Court. The learned
counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has filed a protest
petition before the Sub Registrar and requested this Court to direct the Sub
Registrar to consider the protest petition at the time of registration of the
documents. This plea made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is also
un-sustainable, since the Sub Registrar cannot sit upon the Decree passed
by the Civil Court and the Sub Registrar is also bound by the same and
therefore, the protest petition filed by the petitioner in the light of the
Decree passed by the competent Civil Court, does not have any legs to
stand.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17836 of 2020
5. This Court does not find any merits in this Writ Petition and
accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the
connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
06.10.2023
NCC:yes/no
Index:yes/no
Internet:yes/no
tsg
To
1.The District Registrar (Admin),
Madurai District, Mahal, Madurai
2.The Sub Registrar,
Tirupparankundram,
S.R.O., Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.17836 of 2020
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
tsg
W.P.(MD)No.17836 of 2020
06.10.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
