Partly allowed

M.Rajalakshmi v. the Sub Registrar

Madras HC13 Jul 2015WP(MD)/11926/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Article 226, the petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondent Sub-Registrar to register documents regarding parts of land. The Court directed the petitioners to comply with the respondent's document requirements within two weeks and directed the respondent to register documents if in order.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to comply with respondent's requirements within two weeks; respondent to register documents if in order within four weeks.

M.Rajalakshmi Vs the Sub Registrar — Property and Title | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 13.07.2015

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

¶5

W.P(MD).No.11926 of 2015

¶6

1.M.Rajalakshmi 2.V.Dhanavalli 3.A.N.Jeeva 4.Bhuvaneswari ... Petitioners Vs

¶7

The Sub-Registrar, O/o the Sub-Registrar, Sivagangai Joint – II, Sivagangai Taluk, Sivagangai District. ... Respondent

¶8

Prayer:- This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to register the documents submitted by the petitioners firm regarding the parts of land in S.Nos.88, 87, 81, 89, 78, 79 and 81 situated at Keelakandani village, Sivagangai Taluk, Sivagangai District.

¶9

For petitioners : Mr.V.Perumal

¶10

For respondent : Mr.N.S.Karthikeyan Addl. Govt. Pleader

¶11

ORDER

¶12

This petition has been filed by the petitioners to register the documents in question submitted by them regarding the parts of land in S.Nos.88, 87, 81, 89, 78, 79 and 81 situated at Keelakandani village, Sivagangai Taluk, Sivagangai District.

¶13

Mr.N.S.Karthikeyan, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondent. He would submit that on the very same subject, in an earlier occasion, this Court directed the respondent therein to consider the claim made in W.P.(MD).No.11625 of 2015 dated 09.07.2015 with a direction that if the documents presented by the petitioner are in order, the respondent was directed to consider and register it, in accordance with law. In the case on hand also, the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ learned Additional Government Pleader prayed for the same order.

¶14

¶15

Considering the above-said submission, the petitioners are directed to comply with the requirements of the respondent for registering the document in question, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Needless to say that if the documents are in order, the respondent shall pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving notice to the interested parties, if any, within a period of four weeks, thereafter.

¶16

With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶17

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CO)

¶18

/True copy/

¶19

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶20

¶21

The Sub-Registrar, O/o the Sub-Registrar, Sivagangai Joint – II, Sivagangai Taluk, Sivagangai District.

¶22

+1cc to Mr.V.Perumal,Advocate SR.No. 38138

¶23

W.P(MD).No.11926 of 2015 13.07.2015

¶24

ssm

¶25

PA/PRV/20.07.2015/2P/3C

¶26

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M.Rajalakshmi v. the Sub Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Rajalakshmi v. the Sub Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R. Sivanthi Vs the Tahsildar

V.Rajangam Vs the Tahsildar

D. Pandian Vs the Tahsildar

Ahamadha Vs the Tahsildar

M/S Vasantham Agencies, Vs the Chief General Manager

King Universe Matriculation Vs the Registrar