Disposed

Valliammal @ Valliammai (Died) v. The Regional Deputy Inspector General of Registration

Madras HC4 Dec 2023WP(MD)/7786/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court held that since a civil suit on the same cause of action is pending, the writ petition regarding registration disputes should not be examined on merits. The petition was disposed of without costs, leaving the civil court to decide the issue.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; petitioner directed to pursue remedy in pending suit before Subordinate Judge, Keeranur.

Valliammal @ Valliammai (Died) Vs The Regional… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.7786 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED :04.12.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.7786 of 2022

¶7

Subramanian

¶8

(Petitioner is substituted vide

¶9

Court order dated 03.11.2023)

¶10

... Petitioner

¶11

Vs.

¶12

1.The Regional Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Tiruchirappalli.

¶13

2.The District Registrar, Pudukottai Registration Department, Pudukottai District.

¶14

3.The Sub Registrar, Kulathur, Pudukkottai District.

¶15

4.Lakkyyan

¶16

5.Amsa

¶17

... Respondents

¶18

PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the

¶19

Page 1 of 4

¶20

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

¶21

W.P.(MD) No.7786 of 2022

¶22

records on the file of 2nd respondent pertaining to its order bearing Na.Ka.No.2726/A2/2020 dated 12.08.2021 and its consequential order passed by the 1st respondent by its proceedings Na.Ka.No.4093/E1/2021 dated 18.02.2022 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to cancel the Document No.1854/2004 dated 05.08.2004 forthwith.

¶23

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Balakrishnan For R1 to R3 : Mr.K.Balasubramani Special Government Pleader For R4 & R5 : Mr.S.Muthukkrishnan

¶24

O R D E R

¶25

Heard both sides.

¶26

2.The petitioner impeaches the validity of Doc.Nos.1854/2004

¶27

and 1828/2007 registered on the file of the Sub Registrar Office, Kulathur. It is pointed out that on the same cause of action, the petitioner has already

¶28

filed O.S.No.114 of 2021 before the Sub Court, Keeranur.

¶29

Page 2 of 4

¶30

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

¶31

W.P.(MD) No.7786 of 2022

¶32

3.Since the petitioner has already moved the jurisdictional civil

¶33

Court, I need not go into the correctness of the impugned orders. The petitioner is at liberty to pursue her remedy in the pending suit. The learned Subordinate Judge, Keeranur, is directed to dispose of the suit on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

¶34

4.This Writ Petition is disposed of, accordingly. No costs.

¶35

04.12.2023

¶36

NCC :No Internet :Yes Index :No

¶37

¶38

¶39

1.The Regional Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Tiruchirappalli.

¶40

2.The District Registrar, Pudukottai Registration Department, Pudukottai District.

¶41

3.The Sub Registrar, Kulathur, Pudukkottai District.

¶42

Page 3 of 4

¶43

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

¶44

W.P.(MD) No.7786 of 2022

¶45

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

¶46

¶47

W.P.(MD)No.7786 of 2022

¶48

04.12.2023

¶49

Page 4 of 4

¶50

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

Valliammal @ Valliammai (Died) v. The Regional Deputy Inspector General of Registration

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Valliammal @ Valliammai (Died) v. The Regional Deputy 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

Mohamed Mohideen.S Vs The Director

Boominathan P Vs The Superintending Engineer

T.Velsankar, Vs T.Udayasankar

M/S.India Cements Ltd., Vs the Chairman-Cum-Managing Director

Baluchamy.P Vs The District Collector

Seenivasan Vs The District Collector