Madras High Court
Kannammal vs S.Usharani on 13 November, 2025
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam, Mohammed Shaffiq
W.A.No.3460 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
W.A.No.3460 of 2025
and
C.M.P. No.28273 of 2025
1.Kannammal
2.Rajathi
3.Rani ... Appellants
Vs.
1.S.Usharani
2.The Sub Registrar,
Tiruchengode SRO,
Tiruchengode, Namakkal District.
3.Kannagi
4.M.Vinoth ... Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order
dated 10.01.2025 in W.P.No.773 of 2025.
For Appellants : Mr.N.R.Elango,
Senior Counsel
for Mr.G.R.Deepak
For Respondents : Mr.R.T.Vishnu for R1
Mr.U.Baranidharan,
Special Government Pleader for R2
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/11/2025 12:30:19 pm )
W.A.No.3460 of 2025
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
Under assail is writ order dated 10.01.2025 passed in W.P. No.773 of
2025.
2. Respondents 2, 3 and 4 in writ petition are the appellants before this
Court. On 22.08.1984, father of appellants Mr.Subbaiya executed a settlement
deed in favour of first respondent, who is none other than his granddaughter.
During the relevant point of time, first respondent was a minor. Subsequently,
she attained the age of majority. The said settlement deed came to be
cancelled by the father of the appellants on 01.04.1999 unilaterally. The said
cancellation deed dated 01.04.1999 is under challenge in the writ proceedings
before writ Court. Since writ petition was allowed, the present intra-court
appeal has been instituted.
3. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants would
mainly contend that impugned final writ order has been passed at the
admission stage and no opportunity was afforded to the appellants to putforth
their case. Writ petition has been instituted after a long delay and therefore,
writ petition ought to have been rejected on the ground of delay and laches.
That apart, a civil suit for partition between the parties is pending and several
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/11/2025 12:30:19 pm )
issues have been raised in the suit. Said fact was also not brought to the
notice of writ Court at the time of passing the impugned writ order. Thus, the
writ appeal is to be considered.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of first respondent would
oppose by stating that admittedly, writ petition has been filed challenging
cancellation deed and the issues are covered by the decision of Full Bench of
this Court. Therefore, writ Court has allowed the writ petition at the admission
stage and thus, writ appeal is to be rejected. That apart, the details regarding
civil suit are also stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition.
5. This Court is of the considered view that the issue raised regarding
unilateral cancellation of settlement deed is no more res integra. Two different
Full Benches of this Court have ruled that unilateral cancellation of settlement
deed is null and void.
6. In the case of Latif Estate Line India Ltd. Vs. Hadeeja Ammal &
Ors., reported in (2011) 2 CTC 1, the Full Bench of this Court held as follows:-
'59. After giving out anxious consideration on the questions raised
in the instant case, we come to the following conclusion:-
(i) A Deed of Cancellation of a sale unilaterally executed by
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/11/2025 12:30:19 pm )
the transferor does not create, assign, limit or extinguish any right,
title or interest in the property and is of no effect. Such a document
does not create any encumbrance in the property already
transferred. Hence, such a Deed of Cancellation cannot be
accepted for registration.
(ii) Once title to the property is vested in the transferee by
the sale of the property, it cannot be divested unto the transferor
by execution and registration of a Deed of Cancellation even with
the consent of the parties. The proper course would be to re-
convey the property by a deed of conveyance by the transferee in
favour of the transferor.
(iii) Where a transfer is effected by way of sale with the
condition that title will pass on payment of consideration,and such
intention is clear from the recital in the deed, then such instrument
or sale can be cancelled by a Deed of Cancellation with the
consent of both parties on the ground of non-payment of
consideration. The reason is that in such a Sale Deed, admittedly,
the title remained with the transferor.
(iv) In other case, a complete and absolute sale can be
cancelled at the instance of the transferor only by taking recourse
to the Civil Court by obtaining a decree of cancellation of Sale
Deed on the ground inter alia of fraud or any other valid reasons.'
7. The said position has been reiterated by another Full Bench of this
Court in the case of Sasikala Vs. Revenue Divisional Officer reported in
(2022) 7 MLJ 1 , wherein, it held as follows:-
'59. Much ado was sought to be made by
contending that the Appellant approached the High Court
without disclosing the previous orders of the High Court
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/11/2025 12:30:19 pm )
and this Court, relegating them to civil court for the
adjudication of their claim. Reliance was also placed in
this regard on the decision of this Court in Raj Kumar
Soni vs. State of U.P. (2007) 10 SCC 635.'
8. In view of the ratio laid down by two Full Bench judgments (cited
supra), unilateral cancellation of settlement deed, which is under challenge in
the writ proceedings cannot be sustained. In view of the above reasons,
present intra-court appeal stands dismissed. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
9. However, the appellants are at liberty to raise all the grounds in the
pending suit for partition in O.S.No.500 of 2023 on the file of Subordinate
Court, Namakkal and the civil Court shall adjudicate the issues independently
and uninfluenced by the observations made in the writ order on facts.
[S.M.S., J.] [M.S.Q., J.]
13.11.2025
Index:Yes/No
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
mmi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/11/2025 12:30:19 pm )
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
mmi
To
1. The Sub Registrar,
Tiruchengode SRO,
Tiruchengode, Namakkal District.
2.The Subordinate Court,
Namakkal.
13.11.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/11/2025 12:30:19 pm )
