Monday, 11, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Latha vs The Sub Registrar
2026 Latest Caselaw 520 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 520 Mad
Judgement Date : 19 February, 2026

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Latha vs The Sub Registrar on 19 February, 2026

Author: Krishnan Ramasamy
Bench: Krishnan Ramasamy
                                                                                          WP(MD). No.31572 of 2025


                           BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                    Dated : 19.02.2026

                                                           CORAM

                           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

                                              WP(MD) No.31572 of 2025


                     Latha                                                                 ... Petitioner

                                                                Vs

                     The Sub Registrar,
                     Registration Department,
                     Chettikulam
                     Sub Registrar Office (Madurai North),
                     Madurai District..                                                  ... Respondent

                     PRAYER :-

                             Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
                     praying this Court to issue a WRIT OF CERTIORARIFIED
                     MANDAMUS calling for the records relating to the impugned check slip
                     in RFL/chttikulam (Madurai the North) 151/2025 dated 29.10.2025
                     issued by the respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the
                     respondent to receive the settlement deed dated 28.10.2025 executed by
                     the petitioner in favour of her husband and register the same and release
                     the document presented by the petitioner as per the Registration Act
                     1908, within a time frame.


                     1/8




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis                ( Uploaded on: 20/02/2026 06:43:15 pm )
                                                                                       WP(MD). No.31572 of 2025


                                  For Petitioner    : Mr.M.Maruthupandian,

                                  For Respondent : Mr.K.S.Selvaganesan,
                                                   Addl. Govt. Pleader



                                                        ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed challenging the impugned refusal

check slip issued by the respondent dated dated 29.10.2025 and alos

seeking for a consequential directing, directing the respondent to receive

the settlement deed dated 28.10.2025 executed by the petitioner in favour

of her husband and register the same and release the document presented

by the petitioner as per the Registration Act 1908, within a time frame.

2. According to the petitioner, the subject property is the

ancestral property of the petitioner and the petitioner constructed a house

in the subject property after getting building plan approval from local

authorities and the petitioner has been living in the said house along with

her family. While being so, the petitioner intended to settle the above

said house to the petitioner's husband and therefore, she has executed a

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/02/2026 06:43:15 pm )

settlement dated 28.10.2025. Thereafter, when the petitioner was

presented the said settlement deed for registration, the same was refused

to be registered and issued the impugned refusal check slip stating that

the above mentioned house is situated at unapproved/not regularised

house site and therefore, there is a bar under Section 22A(2) of the

Registration Act, 1908. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed

this Writ Petition.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would

submit that the petitioner constructed a house on the subject property

after obtaining approval from the local authorities and has been in

occupation of the said house for more than a decade and therefore, the

question of a bar under Section 22A(2) would not arise. Hence, he prays

for setting aside the impugned order.

4. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for

the respondent would submit that since the house is situated in an

unapproved house site, the impugned order came to be passed. Therefore,

he prays for dismissal of this Writ Petition.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/02/2026 06:43:15 pm )

5. This Court heard the submissions made by the learned

counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on

record.

6. On a perusal of the records, it is seen that the subject

property is the inherited property of the petitioner and the petitioner out

of love and affection, has executed a settlement deed dated 28.10.2025.

Under these circumstances, the respondent refused to register the

settlement deed citing the reason that there is a bar under Section 22A(2)

of the Registration Act, 1908. The bar under Section 22A(2) would

apply one when layout is formed. In the circular/clarification issued by

the Inspector General of Registration dated 16.03.2020, referring to G.O.

(Ms)No.78, Tamil Nadu Housing and Urban Development Department,

dated 04.05.2017, the term “layout” has been defined to mean that if

more than eight plots are formed in the Metropolitan area, it amounts to

the formation of a layout, and no such definition is provided with regard

to other areas. Since the layout is not defined for any area other than

Metropolitan area, the definition provided in G.O.(MS)No.78 for the

word “layout” can be safely apply for other areas as well. The same

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/02/2026 06:43:15 pm )

definition shall be applied to the petitioner's case. Now the petitioner is

only selling inherited property. Therefore, at no stretch of imagination,

one could be construed that the petitioner is selling a plot out of the

unapproved layout. Further, the subject property is an inherited property

of the petitioner and she constructed a house on the said property after

obtaining approval from the local authorities. Hence, the question of

invoking the bar under Section 22A(2) of the Registration Act, 1908 does

not arise in the present case. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be

set aside.

7. Accordingly, the impugned refusal check slip issued by

the respondent is set aside. The petitioner is directed to represent the

settlement deed dated 28.10.2025 before the respondent. Upon

representation of the same, the respondent is directed to register the

settlement deed dated 28.10.2025, forthwith.

8. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is allowed.

There shall be no order as to costs.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/02/2026 06:43:15 pm )

9. Post the matter on 27.02.2026 “for reporting compliance”.

19.02.2026

Index : Yes/NO NCC : Yes/No VSM Note: Issue order copy on 20.02.2026

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/02/2026 06:43:15 pm )

TO

The Sub Registrar, Registration Department, Chettikulam Sub Registrar Office (Madurai North), Madurai District..

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/02/2026 06:43:15 pm )

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

VSM

Date : 19.02.2026

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/02/2026 06:43:15 pm )

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter