Allowed

K.Selvaraj v. C.Susila

Madras HC16 Apr 2021WA(MD)/285/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Writ Appeal challenges an interim order directing police to register a case for fake marriage without prior notice to the appellants. The High Court held the order violated natural justice principles due to lack of notice and set it aside, remanding the original writ petition for hearing.

What did the court decide?

The impugned interim order dated 10.11.2020 directing registration of a case without notice is set aside. The Writ Petition is listed for hearing in June 2021.

K.Selvaraj Vs C.Susila — Property and Title | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.A.(MD)No.285 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 16.04.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM AND

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI W.A.(MD)No.285 of 2021 and C.M.P.(MD) No.927 of 2021

¶6

1.K.Selvaraj

¶7

2.Mariyammal ... Appellants/Respondents 4 and 5

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.C.Susila ... 1^st Respondent/Petitioner

¶10

2.The Inspector General of Registration, Department of Registration, Santham, Chennai – 600 028. 3.The District Registrar, District Registration Office, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District. 4.The Sub-Registrar, Sub-Registration Office, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents 2 to 4/Respondents 1 to 3 5.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District. ... Respondent No.4/Respondent No.6

¶11

Prayer : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.15864 of 2020, dated 10.11.2020.

¶12

Prayer in WP(MD). 15864/ 2020 :

¶13

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd Respondent to cancel the fake marriage registration certificate vide with, marriage serial No. TMR/ Srivilliputtur /83/2019 dated 04.04.2019 on the file of the 3rd respondent office based on the petitioners representation dated 18.11.2019 within the time limit that may be stipulated by this Honourable Court in the circumstances of the case.

¶14

For Appellant : Mr.M.Jothibasu For Respondent No.1 : Mr.A.D.Ganesamoorthy For Respondent Nos.2 to 5 : Mr.K.P.Krishnadass Special Government Pleader

¶15

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

¶16

1/3

¶17

W.A.(MD)No.285 of 2021

¶18

J U D G M E N T

¶19

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by T. S. SIVAGNANAM, J.)

¶20

This Writ Appeal filed by the respondent Nos.4 and 5 in the Writ Petition is directed against the interim direction issued in the Writ Petition without notice to the appellants.

¶21

2.The first respondent filed the Writ Petition, praying for a direction to the District Registrar, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District to cancel the fake marriage registration certificate in Marriage Serial No.TMR/Srivilliputtur/83/ 2019, dated 04.04.2019, on the file of the Sub Registrar, Srivilliputtur by considering her representation dated 18.11.2019.

¶22

3.When the Writ Petition came up for admission, this Court, suo motu impleaded the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Virudhunagar, as sixth respondent and issued the impugned direction, directing him to register a case against the first appellant with a further direction that he should be taken into custody and the truth has to be enquired into.

¶23

4.We need not examine the controversy involved in the matter as it would lead to adjudication of the facts narrated in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents. The short ground, which requires allowing of the Writ Appeal is that the appellants did not receive notice of the proceedings and at the admission stage itself, the impugned order has been passed, which is in violation of the principles of natural justice. This is sufficient to set aside the impugned order dated 10.11.2020.

¶24

5.Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is allowed and the impugned interim order dated 10.11.2020 in W.P.(MD) N0o.15864 of 2020 is set aside. Since W.P.(MD) No.15864 of 2020 is still pending before the learned Single Judge, Registry is directed to list the Writ Petition before the appropriate Hon'ble Bench during the second week of June, 2021, subject to the convenience of the Hon'ble Bench and the matter may be heard and disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

¶25

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶26

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶27

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

¶28

2/3

¶29

W.A.(MD)No.285 of 2021

¶30

¶31

1.The Inspector General of Registration, Department of Registration, Santham, Chennai – 600 028. 2.The District Registrar, District Registration Office, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District. 3.The Sub-Registrar, Sub-Registration Office, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District. 4.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District. Copy to The Section Officer, Writ Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. (To List the WP during the IInd week of June 2021) +1 CC to M/s.G.M.LAW OFFICE, Advocate ( SR-16156[F] dated 17/04/2021 ) +1 CC to M/s.A.D.GANESHA MOORTHI, Advocate ( SR-16450[F] dated 19/04/2021 ) +1 CC to M/s.Additional GP ( SR-16241[F] dated 17/04/2021 ) W.A.(MD)No.285 of 2021 16.04.2021 NS(CO) KB(21.04.2021) 3P 9C

¶32

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

¶33

3/3

K.Selvaraj v. C.Susila

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Selvaraj v. C.Susila

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

The Managing Director Vs J. Lidwin Jeyanthirani

Sri Manavala Mamunigal Trust Vs the Commissioner

Shanmugavalli.P Vs The Accountant General (a and E)

The Member Secretary, Vs S.Bharathan

V.Maheswari Vs v.Thalirkodi

Chandramouli Vs the Corporation Commissioner