Disposed

R.Jalaldeen v. The Inspector General of Registration

Madras HC29 Oct 2021WP/23331/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed respondents to consider a representation alleging fraudulent registration of a document and pass appropriate orders after holding an enquiry within 20 weeks, without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents 1 to 6 to consider the petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders after holding an enquiry within 20 weeks.

R.Jalaldeen Vs The Inspector General of Registration — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.10.2021

¶2

CORAM:

¶3

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

¶4

W.P. No.23331 of 2021

¶5

R.Jalaldeen ...Petitioner

¶6

-Vs-

¶7

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

¶8

The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Registration Department, Mannapuram, Tiruchy.

¶9

The District Registrar, Registration Department, Ariyalur.

¶10

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Perambalur.

¶11

The Revenue Tahsildar, Veppanthattai, Perambalur District. 6. The Sub-Registrar, Veppanthattai S.R.O. Perambalur District. 7. Mr. Madrsha ...Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: This Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider and pass order on the petitioner representation dated 01.09.2021 based on the proceedings of the Revenue Tahsildar by his proceeding No.Moo.Mu.Aa2/1751/2017 dated 22.12.2017 with the time frame and pass appropriate orders accordingly. For Petitioner :: Mr. T. Dharani For Respondents 1-6 :: Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan (Government Advocate) For Respondent-7 :: No Appearance

¶13

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

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

The relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to consider and pass order on the petitioner representation dated 01.09.2021 based on the proceedings of the Revenue Tahsildar by his proceeding No.Moo.Mu.Aa2/1751/2017 dated 22.12.2017 with the time frame and pass appropriate orders accordingly.

¶16

Heard Mr.T.Dharani, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Yogesh Kannadasan, the learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 6 as well as perused the material available on records.

¶17

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of the learned counsel for both sides, it is seen that the fraudulent document was registered in favour of Madarsa, vide Document No.1537/1994 on the file of SRO, Veppanthattai, Perambalur District, in respect of land to the extent of Acres 0.25 cents in Survey No.289/4 and 0.21 1/2 cents in Survey No.289/5A in Kaariyanur Village, Veppanthattai Taluk, Perambalur District owned by the petitioner herein. Despite the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 01.09.2021 based on the proceedings in Moo.Mu.Aa2/1751/2017 dated 22.12.2017 of the Revenue Tahsildar to cancel the aforesaid fraudulent document, the respondents 1to 6 have not taken any steps and sent any reply on it so far. Hence, this Court without expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the case, directs the respondent 1 to 6 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 01.09.2021 and pass appropriate orders on it within a period of Twenty weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order after holding an enquiry and affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioner herein in this regard.

¶18

With the aforesaid directions, the Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed if any. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶19

//True Copy//

¶20

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶21

Lbm

¶22

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

¶23

To:
1.	The Inspector General of Registration, Registration Department, 100, Santhome High Road, Chennai - 600 028.
2.	The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Registration Department, Mannapuram, Tiruchy.
3.	The District Registrar, Registration Department, Ariyalur.
4.	The Revenue Divisional Officer, Perambalur.
5.	The Revenue Tahsildar, Veppanthattai, Perambalur District.
6.	The Sub-Registrar, Veppanthattai S.R.O. Perambalur District.
+1c	c to Mr.T.Dharani, Advocate, S.R.No.56135
+1c	c to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.57135
	W.P. No.23331 of 2021
CA(	CO)
RGA	(21/12/2021)

¶24

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

R.Jalaldeen v. The Inspector General of Registration

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Jalaldeen v. The Inspector General of Registration

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B.Sarswathi Vs The Union of India

K.Vasantha Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

R.Sathiya Vs The District Registrar

Dr.L.S.Saraswathi Vs The Director of Survey and Settlement

S.Shanmuga Priyan Vs The Inspector General of Registration

Umayavathi Vs The State of Tamil Nadu