C.SHANTHI v. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION
WP/17721/2025 · 2025-09-16
Krishnan Ramasamy
Transfer Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 52798 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 52798 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
W.P.No.17721 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 16.09.2025 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY W.P.No.17721 of 2025 & W.M.P.No. 26211 of 2025 C.Shanthi
... Petitioner
Vs. 1.The Inspector General of Registration Office of the Inspector General of Registration, No. 100, Santhome Highway, Pattinampakkam, Chennai 28. 2.The District Registrar District Registrar Office, Gandhi Nagar, Dharmapuri 636 701. 1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.17721 of 2025 3.The Sub Registrar The Office of the Sub Registrar, Karagathahalli, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District 636 808. 4.P.Balakrishnan ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3rd respondent to cancel the sale deed Doc No. 1080/2013 dated 09.04.2013 which as illegal and forged and arbitrary pertaining to the property measuring to an extent of 95.13 cents of land Patta No.69 bearing Survey No. 569/3, 569/4 situated at Karagathahalli Village, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District 636 808. 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.17721 of 2025 For Petitioner : Mr. G.Mohammed Aseef For Respondents : Mr. P.Harish 1 to 3 Government Advocate
For Respondent 4: Mr. K.Raja Shrinivas.
ORDER This writ petition has been filed challenging the registration of the sale deed executed by one Goundappan, the father of the petitioner herein, in favour of the 4th respondent.
2. The petitioner submits that the sale deed was forged one i.e., her father had passed away as early as on 13.03.1985, whereas the present sale deed was executed on 09.04.2013. The petitioner would submit that impersonating as the deceased Goundappan, the present sale deed was executed. The petitioner would further submit that no address proof or the ID proof were verified at the time of registering the sale deed. Therefore, it is a clear case of 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.17721 of 2025 forgery and impersonation and that the sale deed has to be canceled.
3. The petitioner would further submit that the petitioner has filed a civil suit in OS.No.84 of 2025 on the file of the Sub Court, Palacode seeking for a declaration that the petitioner is the owner of the subject property, to direct the 4th respondent to vacate and hand over subject property to the petitioner and to declare the sale deed dated 09.04.2013 as null and void.
4. The learned counsel for the 4th respondent admits that the civil suit in OS.No.84 of 2025 on the file of the Sub Court, Palacode is pending and that he has also filed a written statement in the said suit. He would submit that if this Court finds that the sale deed was executed by impersonating the deceased person, comprehensive
order may be passed with regard to recovery as well as declaration and the Civil Court may consider all these aspects and pass an order. 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.17721 of 2025
5. Considering the submissions made by the petitioner and the 4th respondent, prima facie it appears that it is a clear case of impersonation. The person who passed away on 13.03.1985 cannot come alive and execute a sale deed on 09.04.2013. Taking advantage of the similarity in the names, the present sale deed has been executed. It is further shocking that without verifying the ID proof or the address of the vendor, the sale deed has been executed.
6. Both the parties admitted the pendency of the civil suit in OS.No.84 of 2025 on the file of the Sub Court, Palacode and the 4th respondent has also filed a written statement. Therefore, this Court feels it appropriate to direct the parties to pursue the suit in OS.No.84 of 2025 on the file of the Sub Court, Palacode.
7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed with a direction to the Sub Court, Palacode, to dispose of the suit OS.No.84 of 2025 within a period of 4 months, from the date of receipt of a copy of 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.17721 of 2025 this order, by conducting a trial on a day to day basis. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. 16.09.2025 Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No kan 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.17721 of 2025 To 1.The Inspector General of Registration Office of the Inspector General of Registration, No. 100, Santhome Highway, Pattinampakkam, Chennai 28. 2.The District Registrar District Registrar Office, Gandhi Nagar, Dharmapuri 636 701. 3.The Sub Registrar The Office of the Sub Registrar, Karagathahalli, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District 636 808. 7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.17721 of 2025 KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J., kan W.P.No.17721 of 2025 16.09.2025 8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis