Madras High Court
M.Aruna vs / on 6 November, 2024
Author: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
Bench: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
W.P.(MD)No26104 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 06.11.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
W.P.(MD)No.26104 of 2024
and
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.22133 and 22134 of 2024
M.Aruna ... Petitioner
/Vs./
1.The Sub Registrar,
Kottaram,
Agasteeswaram Taluk,
Kanyakumari District.
2.The District Registrar (Societies),
O/o District Registrar,
Nagercoil,
Kanykumari District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to
the impugned refusal order passed by the first respondent vide
RFL/Kottaram/154/2024 dated 03.10.2024 and quash the same as illegal
consequently to direct the first respondent to register the Power of
Attorney Agreement dated 03.10.2024 within the time frame stipulated
by this Court.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No26104 of 2024
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Anto Prince
For Respondents : Mr.M.Sarangan
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by
the first respondent dated 03.10.2024 thereby refused to register the sale
deed, which was presented for registration.
2. The property comprised in S.No.241/8 to an extent of 41.25
cents and the property comprised in S.No.241/11 to and extent of 37.50
cents situated in Azhagappapuram Village, Agasteeswaram Taluk,
Kanyakumari District were owned by the Ramanathapuram Chottu
Vellalar Society Trust. The properties were purchased by the petitioner by
a registered sale deed dated 05.07.2007 vide document No.2552/2007.
In fact, prior to the petitioner's purchase the vendors of the petitioner had
filed a suit in O.S.No.14 of 1976 for title and injunction as against the
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department. It was also
escalated to this Court in S.A.No.74 of 1984, wherein, this Court
declared that the petitioner's vendor temple is a denominational temple
and therefore, the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No26104 of 2024
Department has no role to play and restrained the Hindu Religious and
Charitable Endowments Department from interfering the administration
of the temple. It is also established through a decree that the subject
property belongs to the said community and it is a denominational
character thereby prohibiting the Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowments in its affairs. Thereafter, the petitioner's vendor passed a
resolution to sell the property and the petitioner had purchased the said
property. In turn, the petitioner had executed a power of attorney in order
to deal with the subject property. The power of attorney was executed in
favour of one Robert Monicka Raj and the power of attorney had been
presented for registration before the first respondent.
3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the
first respondent would submit that there is prohibition under Section
22(A) of the Registration Act to register the power of attorney, which
was presented for registration since the subject property stands in the
name of the temple called Karpaga Vinayagar Swamy Temple
represented by its Trustee A.Subramaniya Pillai and even after purchase
of the subject property in the year 2007, the revenue records have not
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No26104 of 2024
been mutated in the petitioner's name. Therefore, the petitioner was
rightly directed to obtain No Objection Certificate from the Hindu
Religious and Charitable Endowments Department since the Hindu
Religious and Charitable Endowments Department is a beneficiary
authority to look into the property belongs to the temple.
4. In SA.No.74 of 1986, this Court by the judgment and decree
dated 18.08.1997 recorded that no doubt the Hindu Religious and
Charitable Endowments Department has got supervisory control only
relating to the collection of contribution and audit fees and apart from
that they have no right whatsoever and dismissed the Second Appeal
filed by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department.
That apart, the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department
never submitted any objections with regard to registration of power of
attorney executed by the petitioner to deal with the subject property. In
view of the above, this Court finds infirmity in the order passed by the
first respondent and it cannot be sustained and liable to be set aside.
Accordingly, the same is set aside.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No26104 of 2024
5. The petitioner is permitted to re-present the power of attorney
deed and on receipt of the same, the first respondent shall register and
release the document forthwith.
6. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is allowed. No costs.
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
06.11.2024
Index : Yes / No
NCC : Yes / No
CM
TO:
1.The Sub Registrar,
Kottaram,
Agasteeswaram Taluk,
Kanyakumari District.
2.The District Registrar (Societies),
O/o District Registrar,
Nagercoil,
Kanykumari District
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No26104 of 2024
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
CM
Order made in
and
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.22133 and 22134 of 2024
Dated:
06.11.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
