Disposed

Karuppiah v. The District Registrar

Madras HC23 Feb 2023WP(MD)/367/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner approached Madras High Court via writ petition against refusal to register a partition deed by the Sub Registrar. Court directed petitioner to follow specific procedural requirements regarding missing parent deed before registration.

What did the court decide?

Direction to petitioner to follow procedure for missing document to obtain non-traceable certificate and publication.

Karuppiah Vs The District Registrar — Madras HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1 W.P.(MD)No.367 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 23.02.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.367 of 2023

¶7

Karuppiah ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The District Registrar, District Registrar Office, Theni, Theni District.

¶10

2.The Sub Registrar, O/o. Sub Registrar, Bodi Nayakkanur Registration Office, Theni District. ... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the entire records, pertaining to the impugned refusal check slip RFL No.21/2022 dated 09.12.2022, passed by the 2nd respondent and to quash the same as arbitrary and consequently to direct the 2nd respondent to register the partition deed document dated 30.11.2022, executed by the petitioner, within the time limit that may be stipulated by this Court.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Raghul For Respondents : Mr.S.Shanmugavel Additional Government Pleader * * *

¶13

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

1/ 4

¶15

2 W.P.(MD)No.367 of 2023

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶18

2.The petitioner presented the petition mentioned partition

¶19

deed for registration. The Registering authority declined to entertain the same. He instead issued the impugned refusal check slip.

¶20

3.The reasons set out in the refusal check slip do not appear to

¶21

be sound. However, the petitioner will have to necessarily adopt the procedure set out in the third proviso to Rule 55(a) of the Registration Rules. The petitioner admits that the original parent deed has gone missing. Therefore, the petitioner has to lodge a complaint before the jurisdictional police. If any such complaint is lodged, the jurisdictional police, after conducting enquiry shall issue non traceable certificate to the petitioner. The petitioner shall also cause paper publication notifying the loss of the parent document. With these two documents namely non traceable certificate and paper publication, the petitioner shall represent the partition deed for registration before the second respondent. The second respondent shall receive it, register it and release it, subject to fulfilment of the other usual formalities. The partition deed shall contain

¶22

2/ 4

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

3 W.P.(MD)No.367 of 2023

¶25

the recital that the original parent deed has not been deposited by way of

¶26

mortgage by the parties to the documents.

¶27

4.With the above said direction, this writ petition is disposed

¶28

of. No costs.

¶29

23.02.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No

¶30

pnn

¶31

¶32

1.The District Registrar, District Registrar Office, Theni, Theni District.

¶33

2.The Sub Registrar, O/o. Sub Registrar, Bodi Nayakkanur Registration Office, Theni District.

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶35

3/ 4

¶36

4 W.P.(MD)No.367 of 2023

¶37

G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.

¶38

pnn

¶39

W.P.(MD)No.367 of 2023

¶40

23.02.2023

¶41

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶42

4/ 4

Karuppiah v. The District Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karuppiah v. The District Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ponmurugan.P Vs The District Collector

Karpagamani.G Vs The Commissioner

Abdul Samad Abbas Vs The Special District Revenue Officer (Land Acquisition)

Jeyalakshmi.K Vs The Union of India

Sridhar B Vs The Sub - Registrar

Nambiappan.B Vs The Sub - Registrar