Writ petition sought mandamus to cancel a registered power of attorney alleged to be fraudulent. The court noted divergent views on Sections 77-A and 77-B of the Registration Act referred to a Larger Bench and declined to decide on merits, disposing of the petition.
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.6177 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.03.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
W.P.No.6177 of 2024 and
W.M.P.No.6837 of 2024
R.Rajesh
... Petitioner
Vs.
Page 1 of 6
W.P.No.6177 of 2024
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to cancel fraudulent document, the power of Attorney dated 04.03.2021 standing in the names of the 6th and 7th respondents, registered as Document No.3896 of 2021 in Survey No.198/8A in the Office of the Sub Registrar, Avadi Chennai based on the reports submitted by 4th respondent in proceedings umu.35/2019 dated 12.02.2019 and 5th respondent dated 12.02.2019.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Gopinath For R1, R4 & R5 : Mr.T.Arun Kumar Additional Government Pleader For R2 & R3 : Mr.U.Baranidharan
Additional Government Pleader
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus,
to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to cancel fraudulent document, the power of Attorney dated 04.03.2021 standing in the names of the 6th and 7th respondents, registered as Document No.3896 of 2021 in Survey
Page 2 of 6
W.P.No.6177 of 2024
No.198/8A in the Office of the Sub Registrar, Avadi, Chennai based on the reports submitted by 4th respondent proceedings in umu.35/2019 dated 12.02.2019 and 5th respondent dated 12.02.2019.
the Registration Act and Sections 77-A and 77-B have been inserted. Subsequently, there is a divergent view regarding the maintainability/applicability and as to whether the Section was to be applied retrospectively or prospectively. Now, a Larger Bench has been constituted to answer the divergent view of the learned Single Judges of this Court. Hence, this Court has stayed the proceedings under Section
Page 3 of 6
W.P.No.6177 of 2024
77-A of the Act and referred the matter to the Larger Bench of this Court. Since the subject matter has been seized of by the Larger Bench of this Court, this Court cannot pass any order on merits. The petitioner shall wait till the outcome of the decision of the Larger Bench of this Court, if he is so advised.
5. With the abovesaid direction, The Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
08.03.2024
mfa Index:Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No
Page 4 of 6
W.P.No.6177 of 2024
To
Page 5 of 6
W.P.No.6177 of 2024
P.VELMURUGAN, J.
mfa
W.P.No.6177 of 2024
and W.M.P.No.6837 of 2024
08.03.2024
Page 6 of 6
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the court should direct cancellation of a allegedly fraudulent power of attorney document while a Larger Bench considers the applicability of Sections 77-A and 77-B of the Registration Act.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
R.Rajesh
The District Collector, Thiruvallur
The District Registrar, Thiruvallur
The District Registrar Avadi, Sub Registrar, Avadi
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Avadi Taluk
V.N.Devadas
P.Velmurugan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
