Dismissed

Balakrishnan v. The District Registrar (Administration)

Madras HC20 Apr 2021WP(MD)/246/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition challenged a settlement deed via representation. The Court held that settlement deed disputes belong to Civil Courts, not the High Court's writ jurisdiction. The writ petition was dismissed as no useful purpose would be served by directing the Registrar to consider the representation.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

Balakrishnan Vs The District Registrar (Administration) — Property and Title | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.246 of 2021 Balakrishnan v. The District Registrar

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH Court

¶3

DATED: 20.04.2021

¶4

CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶5

W.P.(MD)No.246 of 2021

¶6

(Through Video Conferencing)

Balakrishnan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Registrar, (Administration) Tirunelveli District

¶11

Tirunelveli.

¶12

2.The Sub Registrar, Kalugumalai Sub Registrar Office, Kalugumalai Kovilpatti Taluk Thoothukudi District.

¶13

3.Tamilselvan

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 1^st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 28.09.2020 conduct an enquiry and pass orders in accordance with law within a time frame that may be fixed by this Court.

¶16

For Petitioner :Mr.K.Arunraj

¶17

For Respondents :Mr.K.Sathiya Singh for R1 & R2 Additional Government Pleader

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This writ petition has been filed for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 28.09.2020.

¶20

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2.

¶21

In the considered view of this Court, the petitioner is questioning the settlement deed that has been executed in favour of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the third respondent. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the same, he

¶22

1/2

¶23

W.P.(MD)No.246 of 2021

¶24

Balakrishnan v. The District Registrar

¶25

can only approach the competent civil Court and seek for necessary relief. The first respondent will not have the jurisdiction to go into the issue and therefore, no useful purpose will be served in directing the first respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner. This Court does not find any ground for entertaining this writ petition. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. No costs.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

Assistant Registrar(A.S.) /True Copy/

¶28

/05/2021

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS )

¶30

¶31

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.

¶32

¶33

1.The District Registrar, (Administration) Tirunelveli District Tirunelveli. 2.The Sub Registrar, Kalugumalai Sub Registrar Office, Kalugumalai Kovilpatti Taluk Thoothukudi District. 1CC TO THE SPL GOVT PLEADER SR 16980 1CC TO MR. G. CHANDRASEKARAN, ADVOCATE SR 16899 1CC TO MR. K. Arunraj, ADOCATE SR 16779 TR 03/05/2021 2P/6C

¶34

W.P.(MD)No.246 of 2021 20.04.2021

¶35

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

¶36

2/2

Balakrishnan v. The District Registrar (Administration)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balakrishnan v. The District Registrar (Administration)

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

Amalraj.J Vs the Prl.Chief Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption)

Muthusamy. R Vs The District Revenue Officer

Sivakumar.R Vs The Sub Registrar

Vignesh .P Vs The Commissioner

Senthur Pandi. N Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

Rajagopal. R Vs The District Registrar