Madras High Court
The Sub Registrar vs S.Maheen on 8 January, 2024
Author: P.T. Asha
Bench: P.T. Asha
Rev. Appl (MD). No. 104 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 08.01.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
Rev. Appl (MD). No. 104 of 2023
&
W.M.P (MD). No. 12101 of 2023
The Sub Registrar,
Arumanai Sub Registrar Office,
Arumanai, Arumanai Village,
Vilavancode TK.,
Kanyakumari Dist. ...Petitioner
Vs.
S.Maheen ...Respondents
Prayer: Review Petition is filed under Order 47 Rule 1 and 2 read
with Section 114 of CPC to review the order passed by this Court in
W.P. (MD). No. 2290 of 2020 dated 15.03.2023.
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Rev. Appl (MD). No. 104 of 2023
For Petitioner : Mr. Veera Kathiravan,
Additional Advocate General III
Assisted by
Mr. A.K. Manikkam
Special Government Pleader.
For Respondent : Mr. S.Titus.
JUDGMENT
The review application is filed on the sole ground that the review
petitioner / respondent herein has suppressed the fact that the subject
property are unapproved and it cannot be registered. The review
petitioner has relied on the Government Orders in G.O.Ms. No.78
dated 04.05.2017 and G.O.Ms. No. 79 dated 04.05.2017 issued by the
Housing and Urban Development (UD4 (3)).
2. In the Writ Proceedings which is the subject matter of this
review, the Review Petitioner represented by the learned Additional
Government Advocate had informed the Court that they had not made
any demand that the petitioner has to submit a single document for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
registration. The Additional Government Advocate on instructions had
made a representation that the Sub Registrar has no objection to
register several sale deeds. On the basis of this representation this
Court had passed the order now subject matter of review. The
respondent who had made such a representation has now filed the
review application stating that the documents cannot be registered in
the light of the above referred Government Order.
3. The review petitioner has been registering sale deeds on the
strength of the proceedings passed by the District Collector / Chairman
of the District Forest Committee dated 08.01.2019 permitting the
respondent to sell his property. In fact, this order has been enclosed
with each of the sale deeds that had earlier been submitted for
registration by the petitioner. The review petitioner is very much aware
about the nature of the property and the permission that had been
granted. The review petitioner has not made out a case that there is an
error apparent on the face of the record or that they had come across a
new fact which was not to their knowledge to justify the request for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
reviewing the earlier order.
4. As already submitted the order which is now subject to review
has been passed only on the submission made on behalf of the review
petitioner by a responsible counsel. Therefore, the review application
has to necessarily be dismissed. Accordingly, the review application is
dismissed. Consequently, the connected petition is closed. No costs.
08.01.2024
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
kan
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
P.T. ASHA, J,
kan
08.01.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
