Writ petition challenging a Sub Registrar's refusal slip blocking registration of a general power of attorney. The court held that failure to exercise a contractual option to re-purchase made the transferee's title absolute, so subsequent settlement deeds conveyed no rights and registration could not be refused.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P. No.4901 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 04.06.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
W.P. No.4901 of 2021
M.Venkatachalam . . Petitioner
Vs
PRAYER : Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the 1st respondent pertaining to check slip dated 16.02.2021 and quash the same and to direct him to register the General Power of Attorney dated 07.12.2020 executed by the petitioner regarding vacant land ad measuring 6.39 acre comprised in Survey No.602, 6.00 acres comprised in Survey No.603 and 4.02 acre comprised in Survey No.601/B including 1/2 share in the well situated in Ponnapuram village, Darapuram Taluk, Darapuram Sub Registry, Thiruppur District.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Sesubalanraja
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ___________ Page No:1/5_
W.P. No.4901 of 2021
For Respondents : Mr.B.Vijay, AGP for R1 Mr.S.Diwakar for R2
O R D E R
Challenge has been made to the refusal slip issued by the first respondent when the petitioner presented a document for sale of properties. The petitioner originally purchased the property on 27.09.2001 from the second respondent. The sale deed contained classes for re-conveyance. It is agreed between the parties that the property shall be at the option of the second respondent to be reconveyed within three years i.e. on or before 25.09.2004. However, it appears that such option has not been exercised by the second respondent. Thereafter, it appears that the second respondent has executed two settlement deeds in favour of his daughters in the year 2006. At this stage, in the year 2020 the petitioner has executed a power of attorney in favour of one C.Subramaniam to sell his property and when the same was presented before the first respondent for registration, the same was refused to be registered mainly on the ground that two settlement deeds have already been executed in respect of the same property.
___________ Page No:2/5_
W.P. No.4901 of 2021
typed set of papers.
___________ Page No:3/5_
W.P. No.4901 of 2021
one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
04.06.2024
Index : Yes / No Speaking/non speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes/No Asr
To
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
Asr
___________ Page No:4/5_
W.P. No.4901 of 2021
W.P. No.4901 of 2021
04.06.2024
___________ Page No:5/5_
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Sub Registrar could refuse registration of a power of attorney where the seller's option to re-convey had lapsed unexercised.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M.Venkatachalam
The Sub Registrar, Sub Registrar Office, Darapuram, Thiruppur District
M.Ramasamy
N. Sathish Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
