Madras High Court
B.Ramapriya vs The District Registrar on 15 April, 2025
Author: N.Anand Venkatesh
Bench: N. Anand Venkatesh
1/17 WP No. 10273 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 15-04-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
WP No. 10273 of 2025
and WMP No. 11573 of 2025
B.Ramapriya
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The District Registrar
(Administration)
Central Chennai,
Office of District Registrar,
Chamiers Road, Chennai-600 018
2.The Sub Registrar
Villivakkam, Mogappair West,
Ambattur Industrial Estate,
Chennai-600 037
3.The Tahsildar
Ambattur Taluk Office,
P.I Cycle Industries,
Near Tiruvallur High Road,
Ambattur Chennai-600 053
4.K.Srinivasan
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
2/17 WP No. 10273 of 2025
5.P.Ravichandran
6.V.Kailasam
7.The Unique Identification Authority
Of India (UIDAI),
Represented By Its Chairman,
Khanija Bhawan,
No.49, III Floor,
South Wing, Race Course Road,
Bengaluru - 560 001.
Respondent(s)
(R7-suo motu impleaded as per order dated 25.03.2025 In WP.No.10273 of
2025)
PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of a Writ of Declaration, declaring the registration of the fraudulent
execution of the Sale deed dated 09.02.2024 registered as Doc.No.905 of 2024
on the file of the 2nd respondent as perse illegal, void, non-est in the eye of the
law, unenforceable, without jurisdiction and against the public policy and
consequently direct the 2nd respondent to remove/delete the entry in Book-1
and encumbrance certificate in respect of the said Sale Deed dated 9.2.2024 and
also to direct the 3rd respondent to cancel the TSLR patta fraudulently obtain in
favour of the 6th respondent over the land to the extent of 2400 sq.ft comprised
in Survey No.610/A-2, New survey No.610/A2A1B, bearing plot No.6 forming
part of the layout in P.D.R.Nagar, situated at No.54, (Old No.61) Korattur
Village, Ambattur Taluk, Tiruvallur District within a time to be stipulated by
this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
3/17 WP No. 10273 of 2025
For Petitioner(s): Mr.R. Murali
For Respondent(s): Mr.U.Baranidharan
Special Government Pleader
for R1 to R3
Mr.Alan David Rufus
for R6
Mr.A.R.L.Sundaresan
Additional Solicitor General
assisted by
Mr. K.Srinivasa Murthy for R7
ORDER
When this writ petition came up for hearing on 25.03.2025, this Court
passed the following order:
The Unique Identification Authority of India [UIDAI],
Represented by its Chairman, Khanija Bhawan, No.49, III Floor,
South Wing, Race Course Road, Bengaluru - 560 001, is suo
motu added as seventh respondent in the writ petition.
2. Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government
Pleader takes notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3.
Mr.K.Srinivasamurthy, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of
the impleaded seventh respondent. Notice to respondents 4 to 6
returnable by 15.04.2025. Private notice is also permitted.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
3. The specific ground that has been taken by the
petitioner is that the petitioner was impersonated by one
Ramapriya and she had executed a fraudulent sale deed bearing
Document No.905 of 2024 in favour of the sixth respondent with
respect to the subject property that belonged to the petitioner, by
producing a fake Aadhaar card. Based on the same, the sixth
respondent colluded with the fifth respondent and managed to
add his name in the TSLR. The petitioner after coming to know
of the same, filed a protest petition before the second respondent
with a request not to entertain registration of any further
document pertaining to the subject property. The petitioner also
gave a complaint to the Commissioner of Police,
Commissionerate Avadi, against the sixth respondent and an FIR
came to be registered in Crime No.22/2025 for offences under
Sec.120B, 419, 465, 468, 467, 471 & 420 IPC.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that the Aadhaar card that has been given
to the petitioner carries the number 8467 7365 2010, and the
fake Aadhaar card produced before the second respondent bears
the number 5168 5513 9058.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
impleaded seventh respondent shall take written instructions
with respect to the genuineness of the alleged fake Aadhaar card
No.5168 5513 9058 that was produced before the second
respondent.
6. Post this writ petition along with W.P.No.1062 of 2025
and W.P.No.8801 of 2025 under the caption 'for orders' on
15.04.2025. In the meantime, there shall be a direction to the
second respondent not to entertain registration of any documents
pertaining to the subject property until further orders are passed
in this writ petition.
2.When this writ petition was taken up for hearing today, the 6th
respondent who is the purchaser of the property has filed a counter affidavit and
the relevant portions are extracted hereunder:
2. I respectfully submit that I am a bona fide purchaser for
valid consideration of the property comprised in Town Survey
No. 67/32, measuring an extent of 2400 sq. ft, situated at
Korattur Village, Ambattur Taluk, Tiruvallur District, under a
Sale Deed dated 09.02.2024, registered as Document No. 905 of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
2024 on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Villivakkam.
3. I state that I purchased the said property believing the
same to be genuine, lawful, and free from encumbrance, relying
on the documents produced before the registering authority. At
the time of execution, I had no reason to suspect any
impersonation or forgery involved in the execution of the Sale
Deed. I acted in good faith and had no knowledge of the
impersonation, or any fraud committed by the executant.
4. I further submit that I am a victim of the impersonator
who fraudulently posed as the true owner of the subject
property. Upon learning of the complaint made by the Petitioner
and the subsequent criminal investigation, I was shocked and
distressed to discover that I had been deceived and defrauded by
an unknown person who had falsely represented herself to be the
lawful owner of the property.
5. I submit that I have no objection to the prayer sought
for by the Petitioner, as I have been misled into purchasing the
property through fraudulent means. I am fully cooperating with
the investigation initiated by the authorities in Crime No. 22 of
2025 and I am committed to pursuing appropriate remedies in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
accordance with law to recover my financial losses and initiate
legal action against the impersonator and others involved in the
fraudulent transaction.
6. I further submit that I had no role whatsoever in any
conspiracy or collusion as alleged in the Writ Petition. I am an
innocent and unsuspecting purchaser who has suffered due to
the fraudulent and illegal acts of the impersonator. I place my
full faith in the wisdom of this Hon'ble Court and the law
enforcement authorities to bring the real culprits to justice.
7.In view of the above, I most respectfully submit that I
have no objection to the prayers sought by the Petitioner, and I
stand with her in seeking the annulment of the fraudulent Sale
Deed dated 09.02.2024.
3.Pursuant to the earlier directions issued by this Court, the 7th respondent
has also filed an affidavit. The 7th respondent is represented by
Mr.A.R.L.Sundaresan, learned Additional Solicitor General. The learned
Additional Solicitor General relied upon Paragraph Nos.9 to 18 in the affidavit
and the same is extracted hereunder:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
9. It is submitted that the only provision which enables the
Authority to disclose the identity information or authentication
records of the resident is Section 33 of the Aadhaar Act {read
with Regulation 3 of the Aadhaar (Sharing of Information)
Regulations, 2016}, which states that the identity information or
authentication records of an Aadhaar Number Holder (defined
below) can be disclosed by the Authority only after an order to
that effect which is passed by the Judge of a High Court. The
said Section 33 (1) also provides that such Order of disclosure
can only be passed after an opportunity of hearing is provided to
the Authority and the concerned Aadhaar Number Holder.
Section 33- Disclosure of information in certain
cases:-
(1) Nothing contained in sub-section (2) or sub-
section (5) of section 28 or sub-section (2) of section
29 shall apply in respect of am disclosure of
information, including identity information or
authentication records, made pursuant to an order of a
court not inferior to that of a [Judge of a High Court]:
Provided that no order by the court under this
sub-section shall be made without giving an
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
opportunity of hearing to the Authority [and the
concerned Aadhaar number holder].
[Provided further that the core biometric
information shall not be disclosed under this sub-
section.]
10. As per Aadhaar (Sharing of Information) Regulations,
2016, Chapter II Restrictions on Sharing of Identity information
states as under.
Regulation 3- Sharing of information by the
Authority:-
(4) The Authority may share demographic
information and photograph, and the authentication
records of an Aadhaar number holder when required
to do so in accordance with Section 33 of the Act.
11. The term "Aadhaar Number Holder" as stated under
the aforesaid Regulation 3 (4) of the Aadhaar (Sharing of
Information) Regulations, 2016 is defined under Section 2 (b) of
the Aadhaar Act: -
Section 2 (b) - Aadhaar number holder means
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
an individual who has been issued an Aadhaar
Number under this Act.
12. That while dealing with the purport of the aforesaid
section 33 (1) of the Aadhaar Act, 2016 (as amended) the
Constitution bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the
case of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy&Anr. vs. Union of India &Ors,
reported as 2019 1 SCC 1 had observed as under-
"Para 344 at page 420-421 ........ We, therefore, clarify
the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 33 by
reading into the provisions that an individual whose
information is sought to be released shall be afforded
an opportunity of hearing. There is a reasonable
presumption that the said court shall take into
consideration relevant law including Article 20(3) of
the Constitution as well as privacy rights or other
rights of that person before pussing such an order.
Moreover, a person in respect of whom order is
passed shall also be heard and will have right to
challenge the order in a higher forum. Not only this,
proviso to Section 33(1) puts an additional safeguard
by providing that even UIDAI shall be heard before
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
an order is passed to this effect by the Court. In that
sense, the Authority is to act as trustee and it may
object to passing of the order by the court. Such a
happening is actually taken place. We have already
noticed that against the order of the High Court of
Bombay in some criminal proceedings, order was
passed directing the Authority to give biometric
information of a person, the Authority had filed
Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 2524 of 2014
challenging the said order on the ground that giving of
such biometric information was contrary to the
provisions of the Aadhaar Act as the information was
confidential. This Court stays the operation of the said
order which depicts that there are sufficient
safeguards provided in sub-section (1) of Section 33
itself."
13. It is also submitted that under such circumstances any
disclosure of information pertaining to such Aadhaar number
holder without giving an opportunity of hearing to him under
section 33(1) would not only be in violation of the mandate of
the Aadhaar Act, 2016 (as amended) but would also further
erode the very purpose of the judgement passed by the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
Constitution bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Justice K.S.
Puttuswamy (Retd.) and Anr. Vs Union of India reported as 2019
1 SCC 1 as per which a prior hearing to the concerned Aadhaar
number holder is inevitable. It is also submitted that disclosure
of any Information without giving an opportunity of hearing to
the concerned Aadhaar number holder would be in violation of
Article 20(3) of the Constitution as well as the privacy rights or
other rights of that person(s).
14. It is submitted that in view of the aforesaid provisions
and judgment, it can be summarized that disclosure of identity
information or authentication records other than core biometric
(iris, fingerprints) can only be made, pursuant to an order of
Judge not inferior to that of a High Court, after providing an
opportunity of hearing to the said Authority and the concerned
Aadhaar Number Holder.
15. It is further submitted that Aadhaar Number is
generated by submitting the demographic and biometric
information and the same is issued digitally signed by UIDAI
which can be verified on the secure QR CODE. Secure QR
CODE contains Ref Id, Name, Gender, DOB, Mobile, Email,
Address, Photograph and 2048-bit digital signature. Aadhaar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
QR Code is available on Aadhaar Letter, e-Aadhaar and m-
Aadhaar can be read through mobile Apps.
16. Further, as stated in para 4 and para 5 above,
Aadhaar and its platform offers a unique opportunity for the
government to streamline its delivery mechanism under welfare
schemes, thereby ensuring transparency and efficiency. The use
of Aadhaar as an identity document enables beneficiaries to get
their entitlements directly in a convenient and seamless/hassle
free manner by obviating the need to produce multiple
documents to prove one's identity. Aadhaar Number is not used
to track other activities of the resident.
17. The light of the legal provisions of the Aadhaar Act,
2016 (as amended) and the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India passed in Writ Petition No. 494 of 2012 [Justice
K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) and Another Vs Union of India and
Others], it isrespectfully submitted that sharing of the
information without hearing the concerned Aadhaar Number
Holder i.e. Aadhaar Number xxxx-xxxx-9058 shall violate the
privacy of that person under Section 33 (1) of the Aadhaar Act.
Hence, it is prayed that an appropriate direction in accordance
with the above-mentioned provisions may be passed, as deemed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
fit by this Hon'ble Court that would enable this respondent to act
accordingly.
18. It is humbly submitted that in the meanwhile, UIDAI
has initiated action as per Regulation 28 of Aadhaar (Enrolment
and Update) Regulation, 2016 to deactivate the Aadhaar
Number xxxx-xxxx-9058 mentioned in the Order dated
25.03.2025.
4.In the considered view of this Court, the purchaser of the property has
given no objection for the cancellation of the Sale Deed and he has also given
an undertaking that he will co-operate for the investigation that is pending in
Crime No.22 of 2025 on the file of the CCB, Avadi.
5.In view of the above, this Court declares that the Sale Deed dated
09.02.2024 registered as Document No.905 of 2024 on the file of the 2nd
respondent as illegal and non est in the eye of law. An entry to that effect shall
be made by the 2nd respondent, within a period of one week from the date of
receipt of copy of this order. In view of the same, the relevant entry made in the
TSLR shall also be cancelled by the 3rd respondent and restore it to its original
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
position in the revenue records . This process shall be completed by the 3rd
respondent, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of
this order.
6.Considering the stand taken by the 7th respondent in the affidavit and
taking note of the judgement of the Apex Court in K.S.Puttaswamy case, there
shall be a direction to the 7th respondent to submit the relevant particulars to the
police in a sealed cover in order to enable the police to proceed further with the
investigation.
7.This writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No Costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
15-04-2025
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Internet:Yes
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
ssr
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
To
1. The District Registrar
(Administration)
Central Chennai,
Office of District Registrar,
Chamiers Road, Chennai-600 018
2.The Sub Registrar
Villivakkam, Mogappair West,
Ambattur Industrial Estate,
Chennai-600 037
3.The Tahsildar
Ambattur Taluk Office,
P.I Cycle Industries,
Near Tiruvallur High Road,
Ambattur Chennai-600 053
4.The Unique Identification Authority
Of India (UIDAI),
Represented By Its Chairman,
Khanija Bhawan,
No.49, III Floor,
South Wing, Race Course Road,
Bengaluru - 560 001.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
N.ANAND VENKATESH J.
ssr
15-04-2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 02:41:44 pm )
