Disposed

K.Indra v. the District Registrar

Madras HC16 Jul 2015WP(MD)/12175/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court issued a writ of mandamus directing the District Registrar to enquire into a complaint regarding fraudulent registration and initiate prosecution proceedings within six weeks, following Constitutional and administrative guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the First Respondent to conduct an enquiry into fraudulent registration and launch prosecution within six weeks.

K.Indra Vs the District Registrar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.07.2015 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

¶3

W.P.(MD)No.12175 of 2015

K.Indra

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Registrar (Administrative),

¶8

Madurai North, Rajakambiram,

Y.Othakadai,

Madurai District.

2.The Sub Registrar,

Y.Othakadai,

Madurai District.

... Respondents

PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st respondent to pass appropriate orders on the basis of the petitioner's complaint dated 18.03.2012 with regard to cancellation of fraudulent registration and launching of prosecution as per the provision laid down by the Registration Act.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Anbarasu For Respondents : Mr.T.R.Janarthanam, AGP

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The Writ petition has been filed seeking an order in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st respondent to pass appropriate orders on the basis of the petitioner's complaint dated 18.03.2012 with regard to cancellation of fraudulent registration and launching of prosecution as per the provision laid down by the Registration Act.

¶19

2.T.R.Janarthanam, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. By consent, this Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

¶20

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondents may be directed to conduct enquiry based on the complaint of the petitioner dated 18.03.2012 in the light of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Circular 67, dated 03.11.2011 within a reasonable time to be fixed by this Court.

¶21

¶22

4.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the enquiry will be conducted in accordance with law.

¶23

5.In view of the above, without going into the merits of

¶24

the claim made by the petitioner, the first respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on the complaint of the petitioner, dated 18.03.2012, on merits and in accordance with law and also in the light of Circular 67, dated 03.11.2011 within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶25

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

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

Assistant Registrar(T & P)

¶28

/True Copy/

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶30

¶31

1.The District Registrar (Administrative), Madurai North, Rajakambiram, Y.Othakadai,

¶32

Madurai District.

¶33

2.The Sub Registrar,

¶34

Y.Othakadai,

¶35

Madurai District.

¶36

+1cc Mr.D.Anbarasu, Advocate Sr.No.39033 +1cc Spl.Government Pleader Sr.No. 39522 nbj AA/05.08.2015/2p-5c/

¶37

W.P.(MD)No.12175 of 2015 16.07.2015

¶38

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

K.Indra v. the District Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Indra v. the District 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

King Universe Matriculation Vs the Registrar

Karuppasamy Vs the District Collector

R. Aayirakkal, Vs the Revenue Divisional

Rm.Ponnalagu Pattar Vs the Joint Commissioner

M.A. Mohammed Rafiq Vs the District Collector

M.Durai Pandian Vs the Secretary to Government