MOHAMMED SIDDIQ v. The Inspector General of Registration
WP/50059/2025 · 2026-01-29
Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
Transfer Petitionbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 81422 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 81422 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
WP No. 50059 of 2025 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 29-01-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY WP No. 50059 of 2025 Mohammed Siddiq S/o.Udhuman, A 162/1, 45th Street, Rahmath Nagar, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli-627 002 ..Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The Inspector General of Registration No.100, Santhome High Road, Foreshore Estate, Chennai-08.
2. The Sub Registrar of Adyar No.57, Kamarajar Avenue, Adyar, Chennai-600 020 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 07.07.2025 by conducting an enquiry into the fraudulent registration of the settlement deed dated 01.11.2023 registered as Document No.4301/2023 on the file of the 2nd respondent within reasonable time to be fixed by this Honourable Court. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No. 50059 of 2025 __________ Page2 of 4 For Petitioner(s): Mr.Zahir Hussain For Respondent(s): Mr.U.Baranidharan, Special Government Pleader **********
ORDER The petitioner alleges that settlement deed dated 01.11.2023 was fraudulently executed by Mrs.Hameed Fathima in favour of Mrs.Amina Basheer. Therefore, the petitioner submitted representation dated 07.07.2025 to the first respondent and has instituted this case.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the settlement deed and pointed out that it makes reference to an oral gift. Without ascertaining whether the settlor had the authority to execute the settlement deed, he submits that the registering officer registered the instrument.
3. Learned Special Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of both the respondents. He submits that the registering officer does not have the power to cancel the registered instrument. Therefore, he submits that no purpose would be served by directing the consideration of the representation.
4. As submitted by learned Special Government Pleader, the registering officer does not have the power to cancel the settlement deed dated 01.11.2023. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No. 50059 of 2025 __________ Page3 of 4 In fact, it has been held in several judgments that the registering officer does not have the power to adjudicate on questions of title. Hence, no purpose would be served by directing the consideration of the petitioner’s representation. It is, however, open to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional civil court for relief.
5. With these observations, this writ petition is disposed of without any
order as to costs. 29-01-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No RNA To
1. The Inspector General of Registration No.100, Santhome High Road, Foreshore Estate, Chennai-08.
2. The Sub Registrar of Adyar No.57, Kamarajar Avenue, Adyar, Chennai-600 020 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No. 50059 of 2025 __________ Page4 of 4 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J. RNA WP No. 50059 of 2025 29-01-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis