E.C.RAVIKUMAR v. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION
WP/15922/2026 · 2026-04-27
Abdul Quddhose
Transfer Petitionbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 8097 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 8097 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
WP No. 15922 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27-04-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE WP No. 15922 of 2026
1. E.C.Ravikumar S/o. Chinnasamy, No.427 Main Rora, NH79, Kaniyamoor (Post), Kallakurichi District -606 201 Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The Inspector General Of Registration Registration Department, Santhome, Chennai-600 004 2.The District Registrar (Registration) Kallakurichi 3.The Sub-Registrar Chinnasalem Sub Registrar Office, Chinnasalem, Kallakurichi District. Respondent(s) PRAYER Ddirecting the Respondents to correct the erroneous fixation of guideline value as Zero in respect of the petitioners property comprised in Survey No.275/2A measuring 2.97 acres, situated at Kaniyamoor Village, Kallakurichi District and to restore the correct guideline value and ownership entries in the records of the registration Department by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 27.03.2026 within a time frame fixed by this Honble Court For Petitioner(s): Mr.R.Nalliyappan For Respondent(s): Mr.P.Harish Govt.Advocate For Respondent https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No. 15922 of 2026 ORDER This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents to correct the erroneous fixation of guideline value as “Zero” in respect of the property morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition and to restore the correct guideline value and ownership entries in the records of the Registration Department within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. 2. The petitioner had given a representation on 27.03.2026 to the respondents for the aforesaid purpose. Since the said representation has not been considered till date, this writ petition has been filed. 3. Mr. P. Harish, learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 4. No prejudice would be caused to the second respondent if the petitioner’s representation as stated supra is considered on merits and in accordance with law after giving due consideration to the supporting documents filed by the petitioner within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. 5. This Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner’s representation. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No. 15922 of 2026
6.
For the foregoing reasons, this Court directs the second respondent to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law on the petitioner’s representation dated 27.03.2026, seeking for correct fixation of the guideline value for the property morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order after giving due consideration to the supporting documents filed by the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No Costs. 27-04-2026 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No ab To 1.The Inspector General Of Registration Registration Department, Santhome, Chennai-600 004 2.The District Registrar (Registration) Kallakurichi 3.The Sub-Registrar Chinnasalem Sub Registrar Office, Chinnasalem, Kallakurichi District. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No. 15922 of 2026 ABDUL QUDDHOSE J. ab WP No. 15922 of 2026
27-04-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis