Allowed

S.Nagamanickam Alias v. the Inspector General of

Madras HC26 Oct 2017WP/26686/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition filed under Article 226 to quash an order by the District Registrar annulling a settlement deed. The Court held that since identical legal proceedings regarding the deed and a will were pending before the civil court, the administrative order was liable to be quashed.

What did the court decide?

The order passed in Na.Ka.No.2533/Aa1/2012 dated 23.07.2012 and modified in Na.Ka.No.2533/Aa1/2012 dated 02.08.2012 by the 2nd respondent, are quashed. Connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

S.Nagamanickam Alias Vs the Inspector… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated: 26.10.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM

¶5

and

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN

¶7

Writ Petition No.26686 of 2012
and M.P.No.1 of 2012
S.Nagamanickam
alias S.N.Manickam ... Petitioner
vs.
1.The Inspector General of Registration
100, Santhome High Road
Pattinapakkam
Chennai-600 028
2.The District Registrar
(Administration) Tiruppur
3.The Sub Registrar, Udumalpet
4.C.V.Sunny
5.Lilly Sunny ... Respondents

¶8

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the order of the 2^nd respondent, the District Registrar, Administration, Tiruppur, in Na.Ka.No.2533/Aa1/2012 dated 23.07.2012 and subsequently modified in his order Ref.Na.Ka.No.2533/Aa1/2012 dated 02.08.2012 and quash the said order.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.N.E.A.Dinesh For Respondents : Mr.R.Vijayakumar, Addl.Govt.Pleader for R1 to R3 Mr.M.R.Thangavel, for R4 and R5.

¶10

ORDER

¶11

(Order of the Court was made by A.SELVAM,J.)

¶12

This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to call for records relating to the order passed in Na.Ka.No.2533/Aa1/2012 dated 23.07.2012 and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ subsequently modified in Ref.Na.Ka.No.2533/Aa1/2012 dated 02.08.2012

¶13

by the 2^nd respondent and quash the same by way of issuing a writ of Certiorari.

¶14

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended to the effect that the petitioner has married two wives. The respondents 4 and 5 herein are the children born through his second wife. On 18.09.2009, the petitioner has executed a settlement deed in favour of the daughters born through his first wife and the same has been challenged in O.S.No.31 of 1997. Against the judgments and decree passed by the trial court and the First Appellate Court, Second Appeal No.651 of 2008 is pending on the file of this court. During interregnum period, the 2^nd respondent has annulled the settlement deed dated 18.09.2009 in view of the Circular No.67 dated 03.11.2011 and therefore, the orders passed by the 2^nd respondent are liable to be quashed.

¶15

The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 4 and 5 has fairly conceded to the effect that some litigations are pending between the parties in respect of the settlement deed dated 18.09.2009 and also a Will.

¶16

Considering the fact that for identical issue, legal proceedings are pending before civil forum and also considering the fact that original order as well as modification order has been passed by the 2^nd respondent only in pursuance of Circular No.67 dated 03.11.2011, this court is of the view that the order passed by the 2^nd respondent are liable to be quashed.

¶17

In fine, this Writ Petition is allowed without costs. The order passed in Na.Ka.No.2533/Aa1/2012 dated 23.07.2012 and modified in Na.Ka.No.2533/Aa1/2012 dated 02.08.2012 by the 2^nd respondent, are quashed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Sd/Asst.Registrar

/true copy/

Sub Asst. Registrar

nvsri

1.The Inspector General of Registration 100, Santhome High Road Pattinapakkam Chennai-600 028

¶24

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

¶25

2.The District Registrar

¶26

(Administration) Tiruppur

¶27

3.The Sub Registrar, Udumalpet

¶28

+1 CC to The Government Pleader SR.No.76353/17

¶29

+1 CC to Mr.N.E.A.Dinesh, Advocate SR.No.76037

¶30

CO-NRJK

¶31

ths : 22.11.2017

¶32

Writ Petition No.26686 of 2012

¶33

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

S.Nagamanickam Alias v. the Inspector General of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Nagamanickam Alias v. the Inspector General of

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

N.Aravamudhan Vs N.Rukumani,W/O.Ranganathan

Mr.Solai, Vs The Inspector General of

G.Nagadevi Vs The District Registrar

D.Thangaraj, Vs the Inspector General of

G.Raja Vs The District Registrar

S.Nagamanickam @ S.N.Manickam Vs the Inspector General of