Disposed

The Inspector General of Registration v. Santha

Madras HC1 Mar 2024WA(MD)/321/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Registration authorities appealed an interim order directing acceptance of a 2008 sale certificate without filing fee, contending the writ petition was finally allowed by way of interim order. The writ petitioner undertook to pay the demanded fee if the petition failed. The appeal was disposed of with liberty to argue before the Single Judge.

What the court decided

AI extract

The Inspector General of Registration Vs Santha — Property and Title | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.A.(MD) No.321 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 01.03.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

¶6

W.A.(MD) No.321 of 2024 and

¶7

C.M.P.(MD) No.2988 of 2024

¶8

1.The Inspector General of Registration

¶9

No.100, Santhome High Road Foreshore Estate, Pattinapakkam Chennai-600 028

¶10

2.The Joint Sub Registrar No.IV Madurai ... Appellants

-vs-

1.Santha

2.Sathish

... Respondents

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order, dated 29.11.2023, passed in W.P.(MD) No.26969 of 2023, on the file of this Court.

¶16

_____________ Page 1 of 5_

¶17

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

¶18

W.A.(MD) No.321 of 2024

¶19

For Appellants : Mr.Veera Kathiravan Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.S.Shanmugavel Additional Government Pleader For Respondents : Mr.J.Bharathan for Mr.T.R.Jeyapalam

¶20

J U D G M E N T

¶21

[Judgment of the Court was made by The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE]

¶22

Heard Mr.Veera Kathiravan, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.S.Shanmugavel, learned Additional Government Pleader for the appellants and Mr.J.Bharathan, learned counsel, representing Mr.T.R.Jeyapalam, learned counsel, for the respondents.

¶23

2. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that the writ petition is still pending adjudication on merits. By way of an interim order, the writ petition is finally allowed. According to the learned Additional Advocate General, the said order could not have been passed.

¶24

Page 2 of 5

¶25

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

¶26

W.A.(MD) No.321 of 2024

¶27

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the sale

¶28

certificate is dated 22.08.2008 and the same has been sent by the I Additional Sub Court, Madurai, to the Sub Registrar on 22.12.2008. The Government Order bearing G.O.(Ms) No.28, Commercial Taxes and Registration Department, relied upon by the appellants is dated 23.03.2023. The same would not have retrospective effect.

¶29

4. We have considered the submissions canvassed by the learned

¶30

counsels.

¶31

5. This writ appeal is filed against the interim order. The interim order directs that the sale certificate, mentioned above, shall be accepted without insisting upon filing fee. Such filing fee will be subject to the result of the writ petition. Further direction is given to make an endorsement regarding pendency of the writ petition by filing the document.

¶32

6. Learned counsel for the original writ petitioner, on instructions of the original writ petitioners, undertakes to pay the filing fee as demanded, in case the writ petition is dismissed.

¶33

Page 3 of 5

¶34

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

¶35

W.A.(MD) No.321 of 2024

¶36

7. In view of that, the apprehension of the appellants is taken care

¶37

of. The writ petition is yet to be decided on merits. The parties may putforth their submissions before the learned Single Judge.

¶38

8. The writ appeal is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶39

[S.V.G., C.J.] [M.S.K., J.] 01.03.2024

¶40

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

¶41

krk

¶42

To:

¶43

1.The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Foreshore Estate, Pattinapakkam, Chennai-600 028.

¶44

2.The Joint Sub Registrar No.IV, Madurai.

¶45

_____________ Page 4 of 5_

¶46

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

¶47

W.A.(MD) No.321 of 2024

¶48

THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE and MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR , J.

¶49

krk

¶50

W.A.(MD) No.321 of 2024 and C.M.P.(MD) No.2988 of 2024

¶51

01.03.2024

¶52

_____________ Page 5 of 5_

¶53

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

The Inspector General of Registration v. Santha

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

The Inspector General of Registration v. Santha

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anthony Bensam, Vs Dominic(Died)

M.Subban Vs MUTHAN(DIED),1).Sundaraj

Muthulakshmi Vs Ramakrishnan

Gurunathan.K Vs the Law Secretary of India

The State of Tamilnadu Vs S.Manimuthu

The District Registrar Vs G.Mathivanan