Madras High Court
Mohamed Abdul Azeez vs The Sub-Registrar on 26 September, 2023
W.P.No.1334 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.09.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR
W.P No.1334 of 2023
and
W.M.P.No.1389 of 2023
Mohamed Abdul Azeez ...Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Sub-Registrar,
Poonamallee Sub-Registrar Office,
Poonamalle, Chennai – 600 056.
2.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Road,
Nungambakkam,
Chennai - 600 034.
3.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
No.11/20, A.K.Thangavellar Street,
Kancheepuram – 631 501.
4.The Assistant Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
District Collector's Office Campus,
Kancheepuram – 631 501.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/10
W.P.No.1334 of 2023
5.The Inspector,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram – 602 105.
6.Indian Bank,
Rep. by its Authorized Signatory,
Poonamallee Branch,
No.749 F – Judge Chellappa Naicker Street,
Poonamallee,
Chennai – 600 056.
7.T.S.Krishnan ...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the impugned letter
bearing Na.Ka.No.15 of 2022 dated 02.03.2022 issued by the fifth respondent
to the first respondent in respect of all the approved plots comprised in
S.No.25/2 in Agaramel Village, Poonamallee Taluk, Thiruvallur District and to
quash the same and to consequently directing the first respondent to register
the documents pertaining to the said plots.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.S.Rishi
For Respondents : Mr.N.Naveen Kumar
Government Advocate for R1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/10
W.P.No.1334 of 2023
: Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan
Special Government Pleader (HR & CE)
for R2 to R5
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed challenging the communication of the
fifth respondent dated 02.03.2022 addressed to the first respondent requesting
him not to entertain any documents for registration in respect of 19 items of
the properties mentioned in the communication.
2. The communication was made by the fifth respondent mainly
on the ground that the properties mentioned therein are subject matter of the
Will executed by one Veeravalli Pattammal @ Thiruvenkadammal wife of
Krishnamachariyar. In the said Will, the properties referred to in the
communication alleged to have been endowed for performing certain rituals
and Dharmam in various temples viz., Sri Pachai Varana Perumal
Devasthanam and Sri Amirthavalli.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.1334 of 2023
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner by taking this Court to
the clauses of the Will executed by Veeravalli Pattammal @
Thiruvenkadammal submitted that as per the conditions laid in the Will, the
executor of the Will is entitled to sell the properties, if there is no income from
the properties earmarked for the performance of Dharmam and make deposit
of the sale proceeds for the purpose of continuing the Dharmam. One of the
purchased item covered under the Will, namely property in S.No.25/2 is an
extent of 1.51 acres.
4. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the
petitioner also relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court
in Sudha Ravi Kumar and another Vs. The Special Commissioner and
Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Chennai 34 and others, reported in 2017 SCC Online Mad 19191.
5. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents 2 to 5 submitted that under the Will executed by Veeravalli
Pattammal @ Thiruvenkadammal, a specific endowment was created for doing
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.1334 of 2023
rituals service and therefore, the executor is not entitled to sell the properties.
proceeds. Even assuming that the executor is empowered to sell the properties,
it can be done, only after necessary permission from the Court. In the case on
hand, the properties said to have been sold to number of persons by the
executor without following any process of law.
6. It is also submitted by the learned Special Government Pleader
appearing for the respondents 2 to 5 that various Dharmam mentioned in the
Will is not at all taking place. In such circumstances, in order to get revenue
from the properties of the specific endowment, the impugned communication
has been sent by the fifth respondent requesting the first respondent not to
entertain the registration of the documents.
7. The Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Sudha Ravi
Kumar and another Vs. The Special Commissioner and Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Chennai 34 and
others, reported in 2017 SCC Online Mad 19191, while considering power of
the Sub Registrar available under Section 22(A) of the Registration Act, has
issued following direction in para No.26, which reads thus:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.1334 of 2023
"26. In view of the above discussions, all the writ petitions
are allowed and the impugned orders are set aside with the
following directions:
(i) The registering authority before whom the document
has been presented shall cause service of notice on the parties
to the deeds and also to the objector / religious institution, hold
summary enquiry, hear the parties and then either register or
refuse to register the document by passing an order having
regard to the relevant facts as indicated above.
(ii) If the registering authority, refuses to register any
document by accepting the objections raised under Section 22-
A of the Registration Act, the aggrieved may file a statutory
appeal under the Act.
(iii) If the objections raised under Section 22-A of the Act
by the religious institution are rejected and the document is
registered, the remedy for the religious institution is to either
approach this Court by way of a writ petition seeking
cancellation of the registration or for any other relief or to
approach the civil Court for declaration of the title and for
other consequential reliefs.
(iv) If the registering authority refuses to register the
document acting on the objections raised by a religious
institution under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, the
parties to the deed will be at liberty to straightaway approach
the Civil Court for declaration of title and other relief without
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.1334 of 2023
availing the opportunity for filing a statutory appeal.
(v) We further direct that if the deed has already been
registered without there being any objection by the religious
institution under Section 22-A of the Act, the document shall be
returned to the parties concerned leaving it open for the
religious institution to approach either the High Court
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or the Civil Court
for appropriate relief as indicated above. At any rate, the
registering authority shall not withhold the deed which has
already been registered."
8. In the case on hand, the fifth respondent sent a communication
to the first respondent not to entertain any documents for registration of
properties in respect of 19 items mentioned in the communication on the
ground that it belongs to specific religious endowment. Therefore, the first
respondent/Sub Registrar has not considered the same and passed any orders
till date.
9. In the light of the directions issued by the Hon'ble Division
Bench in the above mentioned case law, if any communication is received by
the Sub Registrar from temple under Section 22 (A) of the Registration Act, the
Sub Registrar shall conduct a summary enquiry and decide whether the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.1334 of 2023
documents presented for Registration can be entertained or not.
10. It is also stated by the learned Special Government Pleader
appearing for the respondents 2 to 5 till date, the petitioner has not presented
any documents for registration before the first respondent. In such
circumstances, if the petitioner wants to go ahead with the registration of any
documents covering the properties mentioned in the impugned communication,
as directed by this Court in the above mentioned case law, the first respondent
is expected to conduct a summary enquiry after giving opportunity to the
petitioner and also to the fifth respondent and take a decision with regard to
the registration of the documents. If any order is passed by the first respondent
in such enquiry, the parties aggrieved by the said order is entitled to approach
the Civil Court or file an appeal as provided under the Registration Act in
accordance with law.
11. With these observations,this Writ Petition is disposed of. No
costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
26.09.2023
Index : Yes
Internet : Yes
Neutral Citation Case : Yes
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.1334 of 2023
dna
To
1.The Sub-Registrar,
Poonamallee Sub-Registrar Office,
Poonamalle, Chennai – 600 056.
2.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Road,
Nungambakkam,
Chennai - 600 034.
3.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
No.11/20, A.K.Thangavellar Street,
Kancheepuram – 631 501.
4.The Assistant Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
District Collector's Office Campus,
Kancheepuram – 631 501.
5.The Inspector,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram – 602 105.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.1334 of 2023
S.SOUNTHAR, J.
dna
W.P No.1334 of 2023
and
W.M.P.No.1389 of 2023
26.09.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
