Disposed

Krishnamoorthy Raja. N.R v. The District Registrar(Admin)

Madras HC3 Mar 2021WP(MD)/2867/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought directions under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution for the District Registrar to inquire into complaints regarding fraudulent deed registrations. The Court directed the authorities to jointly investigate both complaints and pass orders within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directions were issued to the 1st respondent to inquire into both complaints jointly, afford a personal hearing, and pass appropriate orders on merits within three months.

Krishnamoorthy Raja. N.R Vs The District Registrar(Admin) — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.2867 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:03.03.2021 CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN

¶4

W.P(MD)No.2867 of 2021

¶5

and

¶6

W.M.P(MD)No.2340 of 2021

¶7

N.R.Krishnamoorthy Raja

¶8

...Petitioner

¶9

¶10

The District Registrar (Admin), Periyakulam,

¶11

Theni District.

¶12

The Sub Registrar, Theni,

¶13

Theni District.

¶14

R.Venkatesan

¶15

Mahalakshmi

¶16

Vijayan

¶17

Ramesh

¶18

.. Respondents

¶19

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st respondent to proceed on the complaint dated 03.11.2020 and take actions against respondents 3 to 5 under Section 82 and 83 of the Registration Act and against the concerned Sub Registrar, Theni as per the circular issued by the Inspector General of registration in Letter No.41530/U1/2017, dated 20/10/2017 and 08/11/2017 for the execution and registration of fraudulent documents.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Natarajan For respondent : Mr.K.Sathiya Singh Nos.1 and 2 Additional Government Pleader For respondent : Mr.J.Pooventherarajan Nos.3 to 6

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the land and building comprised in Door No.13 and 14, Old Pappu Raja Lane Street in S.No.518/2, Old Ward No.17 and New Ward No.25 and present T.S.No.4/1, Ward No.D, Block No.20 of Allinagaram Village, Theni Town, Theni District measuring about 1610 Sq.ft.

¶23

2.According to the petitioner a document was written in the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶24

1/3

¶25

W.P(MD)No.2867 of 2021

¶26

year 1981, as if the petitioner was selling vacant land in favour of one Rajangam father of the 3^rd respondent. According to the petitioner, the document was actually intended to be only a security for another transaction and for not sale transaction.

¶27

3.According to the petitioner, the property continues to be in his possession and enjoyment and patta also stands in his name and all tax being paid by him including property tax as on date. Some documents were registered on the basis of fraudulent transactions and also registered by the respondents at the instance of the 4^th respondent and in order to take appropriate action for registration of rectification deeds in favour of the private respondents, a complaint was submitted by the petitioner to prosecute the persons responsible for the fraudulent registration of deeds under Section 81 and 82 of the Registration Act.

¶28

4.According to the petitioner, a complaint was given on 03.11.2020 to the 1^st respondent, who is under legal obligation to take appropriate action for such registration of invalid and fraudulent deeds. Since there is no action forthcoming from the 1^st respondent, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶29

5.The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that despite the complaint given by the petitioner on 03.11.2020 with all supportive materials, no action seems to be forthcoming from the authority and therefore, he is before this Court seeking a direction to the 1^st respondent to take pass appropriate orders.

¶30

6.At this learned Counsel appearing for the official respondents would submit that the 1^st respondent has already initiated action vide proceedings dated 11.02.2021 and a copy of the same was also produced before this Court today and therefore, the matter would be enquired into and orders would be passed.

¶31

7.When this Court perused the proceedings, it is seen that enquiry notice was issued including to the petitioner herein, but what is mentioned under reference in the proceedings is the complaint of the 4^th respondent dated 16.10.2020. However, the complaint of the petitioner herein dated 03.11.2020 has not been referred to.

¶32

8.When the learned Counsel for the official respondents was confronted with by this Court as to what is the status of the petitioner's complaint, the learned Counsel would submit that a direction may be issued to the 1^st respondent to enquire into the petitioner's complaint as well along the 4^th respondent's complaint together and a direction may also be issued to pass a comprehensive order on the basis of the disposal of both complaints, within a reasonable time to be stipulated by this Court.

¶33

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

¶34

2/3

¶35

W.P(MD)No.2867 of 2021

¶36

9.In view of the above submission of the learned Counsel on either side, this writ petition is disposed of, with directions as under:

¶37

i. The 1^st respondent is directed to enquire into the complaint of the petitioner dated 03.11.2020 as well as the complaint of the 4^th respondent dated 16.10.2020 in pursuance of the notice dated 11.02.2021.

¶38

ii. The 1^st respondent in this regard may call for any materials in support of the respective parties and also afford an personal hearing to all the parties concerned including the petitioner and private respondents, and

¶39

iii. After conclusion of the enquiry, the 1^st respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within period of three months therefrom and a copy of the order along with enquiry report shall be communicated to the petitioner. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶40

// True Copy //

¶41

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶42

¶43

1.The District Registrar (Admin), Periyakulam, Theni District.

¶44

2.The Sub Registrar,

¶45

Theni, Theni District.

¶46

+1 CC to M/s.S.NATARAJAN, Advocate ( SR-8603[F] dated 04/03/2021 ) +1 CC to M/s.J.POOVENTHERARAJAN, Advocate ( SR-8506[F] dated 03/03/2021 )

¶47

+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-8766[F] dated 04/03/2021 )

¶48

W.P(MD)No.2867 of 2021 03.03.2021

¶49

SJ(CO)

¶50

KB(18.03.2021) 3P 6C

¶51

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

¶52

3/3

Krishnamoorthy Raja. N.R v. The District Registrar(Admin)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishnamoorthy Raja. N.R v. The District Registrar(Admin)

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

Karthikeyan Vs Union of India

Ulaganathan Vs the District Collector

K. Gopalakrishnan Vs the District Registrar

A.Antony Yagappa, Vs the Union of India, Repd. by

Balakrishnan.R Vs the Sub-Registrar

Thilagavathi Vs the Commissioner