Madras High Court
J.Gopi vs Nirmalasankaran on 10 September, 2025
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S. M. Subramaniam, C. Saravanan
WA No. 1421 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10-09-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN
WA No. 1421 of 2022
1. J.Gopi
S/o. Jayaraman
Appellant(s)
Vs
1. NirmalaSankaran
W/o. Late Shri. Muthiah Sankaran
2.The Inspector General of Registration
Santhome, Chennai.
3.The District Registrar
Chennai North
4.The Sub Registrar
Konnur, No.5/5, 4th Main Road,
SIDCO Nagar,
Villivakkam, Chennai-600 079.
5.The HDFC Bank
Ceebros Building, I Floor, B Wing
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/09/2025 04:36:02 pm )
WA No. 1421 of 2022
No.110, Nelson Manickam Road,
Aminjikarai, Chennai-600 029.
6.The Sub Registrar
Villivakkam, Chennai.
Respondent(s)
PRAYER
To set aside the order dated 27.04.2022 passed in WP No.6272 of 2022 and
allow the present writ appeal.
For Appellant(s): Mr.B.Manoharan
For Respondent(s): Mr.K.Venkat Ramani
Senior Counsel
for Mr.M.Muthappan for R1
Mr.U.Baranidharan
Special Government Pleader for R2-4 & 6
Mr.N.Zahid Ahmed
for M/s.AAV Partners for R5
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)
th
The 4 respondent in the writ petition has preferred the present intra-court
appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent.
st
2. The 1 respondent, Smt.Nirmala Sankaran, instituted writ proceedings
seeking a direction to the respondents 2, 3 and 4 herein to cancel/annul the sale
deed dated 09.03.2020, registered as Document No.1299 of 2020, executed by
st
the 1 respondent's husband Late Shri. Muthiah Sankaran, in favour of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/09/2025 04:36:02 pm )
appellant, J.Gopi.
3. The Writ Court adjudicated the issues and issued multiple directions,
holding that the Sale deed is null and void, and further granted consequential
directions. The directions issued by the Writ Court, in the opinion of this Court,
is beyond the scope of the powers of judicial review conferred under Article 226
of the Constitution of India. Civil disputes between the parties cannot be
adjudicated in a writ proceeding. Civil rights ought to be established based on
the original documents and evidences, including oral evidence, before the Civil
Court in trial nature proceedings.
4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the 1st respondent
would mainly contend that the Sale deed is null and void, since the sale
consideration has not been paid. When the 1st respondent could able to establish
that the sale consideration was not settled, the Writ Court rightly granted the
relief. In support of the contentions, the learned Senior Counsel would rely on
the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of
Kaliaperumal Vs. Rajagopal And Another1. He would rely on the observations
made by the Apex Court in Paragraphs Nos.18 & 19, and the relevant portion
reads as follows,
“18. Normally, ownership and title to the
property will pass to the purchaser on registration of
the sale deed with effect from the date of execution of
1 2009 4 SCC 193
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/09/2025 04:36:02 pm )
the sale deed. But this is not an invariable rule, as the
true test of passing of property is the intention of
parties. Though registration is prima facie proof of an
intention to transfer the property, it is not proof of
operative transfer if payment of consideration (price)
is a condition precedent for passing of the property.
19. The answer to the question whether the
parties intended that transfer of the ownership should
be merely by execution and registration of the deed or
whether they intended the transfer of the property to
take place, only after receipt of the entire
consideration, would depend on the intention of the
parties. Such intention is primarily to be gathered and
determined from the recitals of the sale deed. When
the recitals are insufficient or ambiguous the
surrounding circumstances and conduct of parties can
be looked into for ascertaining the intention, subject
to the limitations placed by Section 92 of Evidence
Act.”
5. This Court is unable to agree with the learned Senior Counsel, since the
Hon'ble Supreme Court has dealt with an order passed in the S.A.No.1435 of
1990. Thus, it is a suit that was instituted and went up to the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India. That apart, in Paragraph No.17 of the said judgment, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court has observed that "In the event of non- payment of price (or
balance price, as the case may be) thereafter, the remedy of the vendor is only
to sue for the balance price." Even in cases of a non-dispute regarding passing
on the sale consideration, Order XII rule 6 would apply, and the remedy would
lie before the competent Civil Court. However, the Writ Court cannot decide the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/09/2025 04:36:02 pm )
disputed facts of civil nature by conducting a roving enquiry.
6. Article 226 of the Constitution of India would not empower the Writ
Court to annul the sale deed registered under the provisions of the Registration
Act. The writ petition seeking the relief to declare the sale deed as null and void
by itself is not maintainable. Thus, the impugned order passed by the Writ Court
is not in consonance with the established legal position settled by the
Constitutional Courts. Thus, the writ appellant is entitled to succeed. This Court
made it clear that the multiple directions issued by the Writ Court would not
affect the rights of the parties in the event of adjudication of the issues before
the competent Civil Court.
7. Consequently, the writ order impugned dated 27.04.2022 in
W.P.No.6272 of 2022 is set aside and the Writ Appeal stands allowed. No costs.
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, are closed.
(S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.)(C.SARAVANAN J.)
10-09-2025
gd
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Internet:Yes
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/09/2025 04:36:02 pm )
To
1.NirmalaSankaran
W/o. Late Shri. Muthiah Sankaran,
No.14, 2nd Cross Street, HIG-II-Phase
1, Nolambur, Mogappair West,
Chennai-600037.
2.The Inspector General of Registration
Santhome, Chennai.
3.The District Registrar
Chennai North
4.The Sub Registrar
Konnur, No.5/5, 4th Main Road,
SIDCO Nagar, Villivakkam, Chennai-
600 049.
5.The HDFC Bank
Ceebros Building, I Floor, B Wing
No.110, Nelson Manickam Road,
Aminjikarai, Chennai-600 029.
6.The Sub Registrar
Villivakkam, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/09/2025 04:36:02 pm )
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.
AND
C.SARAVANAN J.
gd
10-09-2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/09/2025 04:36:02 pm )
