[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
R.Eswaramoorthy vs The Inspector General Of Registration on 9 January, 2026
Author: Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
Bench: Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
W.P.No.49850 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.01.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
W.P.No.49850 of 2025
R.Eswaramoorthy ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
Santhome High Road,
Pattinapakkam,
Chennai 600 028.
2.The District Registrar,
Tiruppur District.
3.The Joint Sub Registrar – II,
Tiruppur.
4.The Executive Officer,
Arulmigu Visweswara Swamy & Veeraragava Perumal Temples,
Easwaran Koil Street, Tiruppur 641 604.
... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the
records of the 3rd respondent which culminated in the impugned refusal
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:35 pm )
W.P.No.49850 of 2025
rd
check slip issued by the 3 respondent in Refusal Check Slip No.
RFL/2/45/2025 dated 11.12.2025, quash the same as illegal and direct the 3 rd
respondent to register the Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated
11.12.2025 executed in favour of the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Ms.R.Reka
for M/s.Dhanaram Ramachandran
For Respondents : Mr.U.Baranidharan,
1 to 3 Special Government Pleader
For Respondent : Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan
4 Special Government Pleader
**********
ORDER
In this writ petition, the petitioner assails refusal check slip dated
11.12.2025.
2. The petitioner traces title to the relevant immovable property from
sale deed dated 26.01.1956, partition deed dated 25.06.1964 and the ryotwari
patta issued in favour of A.Pazhanisamy Gounder on 22.04.1969.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:35 pm )
3. After discharging the amounts due and payable to ICICI Bank in
respect of facilities availed of by the petitioner from the said bank, the
petitioner intended to register the memorandum of deposit of title deeds in
relation to a fresh loan availed of from the HDFC Bank. Upon presentation
of this document for registration, the request was declined under the
impugned refusal check slip.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a request for
registration in relation to the same property was refused earlier. Such order
of refusal was assailed in W.P.No.30817 of 2018, which was disposed of by
order dated 30.11.2018 directing that an inquiry be held. She also submits
that registrations were made in relation to the said property earlier at the
instance of the petitioner.
5. Learned Special Government Pleader accepts notice for
respondents 1 to 3 and learned Special Government Pleader (HR & CE)
accepts notice for the fourth respondent. Learned Special Government
Pleader for the fourth respondent submits that there is no evidence at all that
the predecessors-in-interest of the petitioner complied with the conditional
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:35 pm )
grant of ryotwari patta by the settlement Tahsildar on 22.04.1969. By
referring to the affidavit in support of these writ petitions, he points out that
the petitioner traces title from documents preceding the ryotwari patta. In
these circumstances, learned counsel contends that an inquiry is necessary
after providing a reasonable opportunity to the temple. He also points out
that the partition deed, which is subsequent to the ryotwari patta (Document
No.2094 of 2003 dated 02.06.2003), does not refer to the ryotwari patta.
6. On perusal of the impugned refusal check slip, it is evident that the
said order was issued by referring to a communication from the Executive
Officer of the temple. In Sudha Ravikumar and others v- The Special
Commissioner and Commissioner, HR & CE Department and others
Manu/TN/1117/117, the Division Bench of this Court issued directions in
paragraph 25 thereof. Clause 1 thereof is as under:
“(i) The registering authority before whom the
document has been presented shall cause service of notice
on the parties to the deeds and also to the objector /
religious institution, hold summary inquiry, hear the
parties and then either register or refuse to register the
document by passing an order having regard to the
relevant facts as indicated above.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:35 pm )
7. It is evident that the above direction was not complied with before
the impugned refusal check slip was issued. Therefore, the impugned order
cannot be sustained and is hereby set aside. As a consequence, the
registering officer is directed to re-consider the matter upon re-presentation
of the instrument by the petitioner. The petitioner shall re-present the
instrument within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Upon receipt thereof, the registering officer shall issue notice to the
petitioner, temple and HR & CE, and after providing a reasonable
opportunity, either register the instrument or issue a speaking order of
refusal in terms of directions issued in paragraph 25 of the judgment referred
to above. This exercise shall be completed within a maximum period of one
month from the date of re-presentation.
8. This writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. No costs.
09.01.2026
(2/2)
rna
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Neutral Citation: Yes / No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:35 pm )
To
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
Santhome High Road,
Pattinapakkam,
Chennai 600 028.
2.The District Registrar,
Tiruppur District.
3.The Joint Sub Registrar – II,
Tiruppur.
4.The Executive Officer,
Arulmigu Visweswara Swamy & Veeraragava Perumal Temples,
Easwaran Koil Street, Tiruppur 641 604.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:35 pm )
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J
rna
09.01.2026
(2/2)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 07:07:35 pm )
