Quashed

Guruvikram.J v. The District Registrar

Madras HC22 Apr 2022WP(MD)/7684/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court quashed impugned orders cancelling a settlement deed passed without a hearing and remanded the matter to the respondent for fresh consideration alongside a connected petition to ensure natural justice.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dated 03.03.2022 and 21.03.2022 were quashed and the matter remanded to the First Respondent for fresh consideration with a fair hearing to all parties.

Guruvikram.J Vs The District Registrar — Property and Title | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.7684 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 22.04.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

¶6

W.P.(MD).No.7684 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD).No.5810 of 2022

J.Guruvikram

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Registrar, Madurai South Registration Office, Madurai South, Mahal,

¶11

Madurai.

¶12

2.The Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar, Arasaradi,

¶13

Madurai.

¶14

3.S.R.Jeyaramdhas ... Respondents

¶15

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.7354/AA2/2021 dated 03.03.2022 and 21.03.2022 and quash the same.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ramsundarvijayraj For R-1 and R-2 : Mr.S.Shanmugavel, Additional Government Pleader.

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned orders dated 03.03.2022 and 21.03.2022 passed by the first respondent.

¶19

In the impugned orders dated 03.03.2022 and 21.03.2022, the first respondent has cancelled the settlement deed dated 18.05.2020. According to the petitioner, the said document was cancelled without granting any opportunity of hearing to the aggrieved parties and it is a unilateral cancellation. On the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice, this Writ Petition has been filed.

¶20

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

¶21

1/3

¶22

W.P.(MD).No.7684 of 2022

¶23

This Court has perused and examined the impugned orders. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the impugned orders have been passed without granting any opportunity of hearing to the aggrieved parties and it is a unilateral cancellation.

¶24

In respect of another property involving another family

¶25

member of the petitioner of the same survey numbers, this Court, by its order dated 21.03.2022 in W.P.(MD).No.4911 of 2022, quashed the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the first respondent for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law after affording a fair hearing to all the necessary parties.

¶26

As the subject property involved in this Writ Petition falls under the same survey numbers, this matter can also be decided afresh by the first respondent along with the connected matter. Here also the principles of natural justice have been violated, as no opportunity of hearing has been granted to the aggrieved parties.

¶27

For the foregoing reasons, the impugned orders dated 03.03.2022 and 21.03.2022 passed by the first respondent are hereby quashed and the matter is remanded back to the first respondent for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law after affording a fair hearing to the petitioner and other necessary parties, whom the first respondent deems fit to enquire, including granting them the right of personal hearing. The first respondent is directed to hear this matter along with the connected matter which is the subject matter of W.P.(MD).No.4911 of 2022 and pass final orders thereafter within the time frame as directed by this Court in the earlier order dated 21.03.2022 passed in W.P.(MD). No.4911 of 2022.

¶28

With the aforesaid direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition stands closed.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

Assistant Registrar (CS III)

¶31

// True Copy //

¶32

/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶33

¶34

¶35

1.The District Registrar, Madurai South Registration Office, Madurai South, Mahal, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Madurai.

¶36

2/3

¶37

W.P.(MD).No.7684 of 2022

¶38

2.The Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar, Arasaradi, Madurai.

¶39

+1 CC to M/s.S. RAMSUNDARVIJAYRAJ, Advocate ( SR-20609[F] dated 22/04/2022 )

¶40

+1 CC to M/s.SPL.GP ( SR-20922[F] dated 25/04/2022 ) W.P.(MD).No.7684 of 2022 22.04.2022

¶41

MGJ(05.05.2022) 3P 5C

¶42

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

¶43

3/3

Guruvikram.J v. The District Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guruvikram.J v. The District Registrar

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

Manikandan Vs The District Collector

Kanakambal E Vs The Principal Secretary to Government

Kanagambal Al Vs The District Collector

Ramakrishnan Vs the District Revenue Officer

B.Ramayee Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

Sathasivam.a.K Vs the District Collector