[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
K.Thilagar vs The Inspector General Of Registration on 24 March, 2026
Author: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
Bench: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
W.P.(MD)Nos.16241 of 2024 and 12727 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 24.03.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
W.P.(MD)Nos.16241 of 2024 and 12727 of 2025
and
W.M.P.(MD)No.14118 of 2024
W.P.(MD)Nos.16241 of 2024:-
K.Thilagar ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
100, Santhom High Road,
Raja Annamalaipuram,
Chennai - 600 028.
2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration,
O/o. DIG of Registration,
Kajamalai, Trichy - 620 021.
3.The District Registrar,
Trichy Joint - I and II, Sub Registrar Office Campus,
Cantonment, Trichy - 620 001.
4.The Sub Registrar,
Woraiyur Sub Registrar Office,
Woraiyur,
Trichy.
____________
Page 1 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
W.P.(MD)Nos.16241 of 2024 and 12727 of 2025
5.The Sub Registrar,
Thillai Nagar Sub Registrar Office,
Thillai Nagar,
Trichy.
6.K.J.Sriram
7.S.Nandhini Devi
8.K.J.Sri Ragavendra
9.M.Ananthi
10.M/s.JM Financial Home Loans Ltd.,
Through its Authorized Signatory / Manager,
7th Floor, Cynergy, Appasaheb Marathe Marg,
Prabhadevi, Mumbai - 400 025.
11.The Manager,
M/s.JM Financial Home Loans Ltd.,
PL.A.Sivagami Towers, C56, 3rd Floor,
4th Cross Main Road,
Thillai Nagar,
Trichy – 620 018. ... Respondents
[R10 and R11 are impleaded vide order dated
23.07.2025 in W.M.P.(MD)No.4233 of 2025]
PRAYER:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to
issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent to cancel the forged
documents registered as Doc.No.5706/2022 on the file of 4th respondent office
dated 24.06.2022 and Doc.No.2129/2024 on the file of 5th respondent office dated
14.03.2024 respectively, by conducting a detailed enquiry in the light of the
____________
Page 2 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
W.P.(MD)Nos.16241 of 2024 and 12727 of 2025
petitioner's representation dated 29.06.2024, within a time frame as fixed by this
Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Santhana Krishnan
For R1 to R5 : Mr.M.Gangatharan
Government Advocate
For R6 to R9 : Ms.P.Yasmin Begum
For R10 and R11 : Mr.S.Balaji
for Mr.S.Babu
W.P.(MD)Nos.12727 of 2025:-
Nandhini Devi ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.The District Registrar,
O/o. the District Registrar,
Trichy,
Trichy District.
2.The Sub Registrar,
O/o. the Sub Registrar,
Thillai Nagar,
Trichy District. ... Respondents
PRAYER:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire records in
connection with the impugned Refusal Check Slip dated 20.03.2025 bearing
Refusal Order Number RFL/Thillainagar/75/2025 to quash the same as
____________
Page 3 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
W.P.(MD)Nos.16241 of 2024 and 12727 of 2025
unconstitutional and illegal, consequently direct the second respondent herein to
register the settlement deed dated 07.03.2025.
For Petitioner : Ms.P.Yasmin Begum
For Respondents : Mr.M.Gangatharan
Government Advocate
COMMON ORDER
These two writ petitions are connected and are disposed of by this
common order.
2. W.P.(MD)No.16241 of 2024 has been filed by K.Thilagar. Upon
hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the material records,
the grievance of the petitioner is that the property originally belonged to his
father, who executed a registered Will dividing the property into A, B, C, and D
Schedules and bequeathing shares to himself as well as to his brother’s son. The
Will also contains a clause restraining alienation of the property.
3. While so, it is alleged that the other branch of the family is
attempting to deal with the property. A settlement deed bearing Document No.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
W.P.(MD)Nos.16241 of 2024 and 12727 of 2025
5706 of 2022 has been registered, and based on the same, another settlement deed
bearing Document No.2129 of 2024 has also been fraudulently registered.
Therefore, by a representation dated 29.06.2024, the petitioner sought for
cancellation of the said documents on the ground that they are fraudulent.
4. Subsequently, when a further document was presented by the seventh
respondent, namely S.Nandhini Devi, the same was refused for registration by a
refusal check slip dated 20.03.2025. Challenging the same, the said S.Nandhini
Devi has filed W.P.(MD)No.12727 of 2025.
5. It is seen that, in the refusal check slip, the pendency of W.P.
(MD)No.16241 of 2024 has been cited as the reason for refusal.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.16241 of 2024
would submit that, even though Section 77-A of the Registration Act, 1908
(hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) has been declared unconstitutional by the
Division Bench of this Court in M.Kathirvel vs. Inspector General of
Registration and others1, it is still open to the registering authorities to enquire
1 (2024) 4 LW 110 : (2024) 5 MLJ 107 : (2024) 4 CTC 769
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
W.P.(MD)Nos.16241 of 2024 and 12727 of 2025
into the matter under Sections 82 and 83 of the Act. Therefore, the petitioner’s
representation ought to be considered and the aforementioned documents should
be declared as fraudulent.
7. The learned counsel further contended that, in the documents
presented, the entire property, including the portion bequeathed to the petitioner,
has been included in the schedule, thereby causing prejudice to him.
8. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the Sub-Registrar
submitted that, during the pendency of the writ petition, after conducting due
enquiry, the impugned refusal check slip was issued.
9. With reference to the claim in W.P.(MD)No.16241 of 2024, it is
submitted that the Sub-Registrar or the registering authorities no longer have the
power to declare a document as fraudulent.
10. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 10 and 11 in
W.P.(MD)No.16241 of 2024 submitted that the properties have already been dealt
with by way of mortgage.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
W.P.(MD)Nos.16241 of 2024 and 12727 of 2025
11. The learned counsel appearing for S.Nandhini Devi, the petitioner
in W.P.(MD)No.12727 of 2025, submitted that the prayer in W.P.(MD)No.16241
of 2024 is no longer sustainable in view of the Division Bench judgment of this
Court. Once the writ petition is disposed of, the reason mentioned in the refusal
check slip would no longer survive. It is further submitted that, in the document
presented, only the portion allotted to the respective branch has been dealt with,
and the mention of Schedule A is only for describing the entire property.
12. I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and
perused the material records.
13. In view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in
M.Kathirvel's case [cited supra], the prayer to declare the documents as
fraudulent cannot be entertained.
14. With reference to the contention that the matter can be examined
under Section 83 of the Act, it is seen that the dispute raised pertains to title and
not to the identity of the parties. Even otherwise, from a reading of the recitals of
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
W.P.(MD)Nos.16241 of 2024 and 12727 of 2025
the document, it is evident that the parties are dealing only with their respective
shares, as reflected in Schedules B and C. In fact, only the half undivided share
in Schedules B and C is dealt with in the documents. Therefore, merely because
the entire extent is mentioned as Schedule A, the petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.16241
of 2024 need not have any apprehension. In any event, if the petitioner disputes
the documents on the ground of title, it is open to him to approach the competent
Civil Court.
15. In view of the above:
(i) W.P.(MD)No.16241 of 2024 stands dismissed.
(ii) W.P.(MD)No.12727 of 2025 stands allowed. The impugned refusal
check slip dated 20.03.2025 is set aside. The petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.12727 of
2025 is directed to re-present the document, and the Sub-Registrar shall register
the same within a period of two weeks from the date of such presentation, if there
is no other legal impediment.
(iii) The parties are permitted to act on the web copy of this order
without awaiting the certified copy.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
W.P.(MD)Nos.16241 of 2024 and 12727 of 2025
No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
24.03.2026
Neutral Citation : No
smn2
To:-
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
100, Santhom High Road,
Raja Annamalaipuram,
Chennai - 600 028.
2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration,
O/o. DIG of Registration,
Kajamalai, Trichy - 620 021.
3.The District Registrar,
Trichy Joint - I and II, Sub Registrar Office Campus,
Cantonment, Trichy - 620 001.
4.The Sub Registrar,
Woraiyur Sub Registrar Office,
Woraiyur,
Trichy.
5.The District Registrar,
O/o. the District Registrar,
Trichy,
Trichy District.
6.The Sub Registrar,
O/o. the Sub Registrar,
Thillai Nagar, Trichy District.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
W.P.(MD)Nos.16241 of 2024 and 12727 of 2025
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
smn2
W.P.(MD)Nos.16241 of 2024 and 12727 of 2025
24.03.2026
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/03/2026 03:10:22 pm )
