Madras High Court
Vittobai vs The Inspector General Of Registration on 2 August, 2024
Author: N. Sathish Kumar
Bench: N. Sathish Kumar
W.P.No.22365 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 02.08.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
W.P.No.22365 of 2024
& W.M.P.No.24359 of 2024
Vittobai .. Petitioner
Versus
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
Registration Department,
No.100, Santhome High Road,
Santhome, Chennai.
2.The Sub Registrar,
Virugambakkam, Chennai. .. Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of
the second respondent and to quash the Refusal No.RFL/Virugambakkam/
33/2024 dated 18.07.2024 and direct the second respondent to register the
Settlement Deed dated 18.07.2024 presented by the petitioner relating to the
property 626sq.ft and 619sq.ft. forming part of Plot No.1 being 3300sq. ft.
at Kamarajar salai, Venkatesh Nagar, Virugambakkam village comprised in
Survey No.16 and Old Survey No.16/12 T.S.No.104/3, Chennai without
insisting to produce the original Sale Deed No.3890 dated 15.12.1965
registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Saidapet.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sreedhar
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.22365 of 2024
For Respondent : Mr.Stalin Abhimanyu
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
With the consent of both sides, this main Writ Petition itself is taken
up for final disposal at the admission stage.
2. This writ petition is filed to quash the impugned Refusal Check
Slip in Refusal No.RFL/Virugambakkam/33/2024 dated 18.07.2024 and
direct the second respondent to register the Settlement Deed dated
18.07.2024 presented by the petitioner relating to the properties to an extent
of 626sq.ft and 619sq.ft. forming part of Plot No.1 being 3300sq.ft. at
Kamarajar Salai, Venkatesh Nagar, Virugambakkam village comprised in
Survey No.16 and Old Survey No.16/12 T.S.No.104/3, Chennai without
insisting to produce the original Sale Deed No.3890 dated 15.12.1965
registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Saidapet.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional
Government Pleader appearing for the respondent and perused the materials
available on record.
4. The case of the petitioner is that she is a senior citizen and she had
purchased the properties to an extent of 626sq.ft and 619sq.ft., of land with
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
building from one Munusamy and others on 15.12.1965 vide sale deed
No.3890/1965 registered with Sub Registrar, Virugambakkam, Chennai, and
she had settled the properties to her sons viz., P.Kannan and P.Saravanan
through Settlement Deeds No.2160/2015 and 3708/2018 dated 23.03.2015
and 27.06.2018 respectively. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed an
application under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior
Citizen Act & Rules 2007, before the second respondent on 15.02.2021.
When the application was pending, the petitioner has filed W.P.No.1797 of
2022 and this Court, by an order dated 16.02.2022, directed the authorities
to dispose of her application and an enquiry has been conducted by the
Revenue Divisional Officer by providing an opportunity of hearing to her
sons and passed an order on 08.03.2022 giving direction to the respondents
to cancel the settlement deeds Nos.2160/2015 and 3708/2018 dated
23.03.2015 an 27.06.2018 respectively. Thereafter, again the petitioner has
filed W.P.No.26201 of 2022 and this Court by an order dated 12.06.2024
declared that the said settlement deeds were void and in such circumstance,
the petitioner becomes the absolute owner. Now the petitioner intends to
settle the aforesaid two properties in favour of her grandson Harish Kumar,
who is none other than the son of Late Ganesh and had also presented the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
settlement deed dated 18.07.2024 for registration. But the respondent has
refused to register the same on the ground that as per G.O.No.438 dated
05.09.2022 sent through IGR Circular No.22482 dated 14.09.2022 original
PR document No.3890 of 1965 not presented. As the said original title deed
is with her son viz., P.Kannan, challenging the impugned refusal order, the
present Writ Petition has been filed.
5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that
though the parent document has been with her son viz., P.Kannan, she
had obtained an order to cancel the said settlement made and this Court had
also declared the settlement deeds Nos.2160/2015 and 3708/2018 dated
23.03.2015 an 27.06.2018 as void, the registering authority is duty bound to
register the settlement deed as her right over the property has been
substantiated vide order passed by this court in W.P.No.26201 of 2022 dated
12.06.2024.
6. The petitioner has challenged the Refusal Check Slip issued by the
respondent. As the order is against the judgment of this Court, no counter is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
required.
7.It is relevant to note that this Court, in the case of Federal Bank v
Sub Registrar, reported in 2023 (2) CTC 289, has held that Sub Rule XX of
Rule 162 has no statutory backing. The said order has been followed by a
Division Bench of this Court in the case of M. Ariyanatchi v Inspector
General made in W.A.(MD).No. 856 of 2023, dated 27.06.2023, wherein,
the Division Bench of this Court has held that, for instance, the original
document is held by one co-owner, the Sub-Registrar can always take an
undertaking or a declaration in the form of an affidavit from the vendors to
the effect that the original document is with the said person and register the
document. Hence, the Sub-Registrar cannot refuse to register a document
merely because the original parent deed has not been produced. In such
view of the matter, the impugned refusal slip has to be set aside.
8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned refusal
slip of the respondent 18.07.2024 stands quashed and the second respondent
is directed to register the settlement deed dated 18.07.2024 executed by the
petitioner in favour of her grandson within a period of fifteen days from the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
date of receipt of a copy of this Order. No costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
02.08.2024
raa
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
To
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
Registration Department,
No.100, Santhome High Road,
Santhome, Chennai.
2.The Sub Registrar,
Virugambakkam, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
raa
02.08.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
