Writ petition filed to quash an order regarding fraudulent documents and direct endorsement due to suspected fraudulent sale deed. Court held pendency of civil suit is not a bar to registration and order was correct, dismissing the petition.
Writ petition dismissed with direction that there shall be no order as to costs.
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.(MD)No.23860 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 20.08.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
W.P.(MD)No.23860 of 2022
S.Murugan
... Petitioner
Vs.
4.Jenise Ebrayem .... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the 1st respondent in Na.Ka.No. 3881/E2/2022 dated 22.07.2022 and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to make endorsement about the fraudulent document in the Doc.No. 1357/2022 dated 09.03.2022 and the consequential documents.
1/6
W.P.(MD)No.23860 of 2022
For Petitioner : Mr.H.Arumugam For Respondents : Mr.P.Subbaraj, Spl. Govt. Pleader for R1 & R2 Mr.V.Muthu Kamatchi for R3 & R4
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the 1st respondent in Na.Ka.No.3881/E2/2022 dated 22.07.2022 and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to make endorsement about the fraudulent document in the Doc.No.1357/2022 dated 09.03.2022 and the consequential documents.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 3 and 4 and perused the materials available on record.
2/6
W.P.(MD)No.23860 of 2022
3. It is the case of the writ petitioner that the petitioner has purchased the subject property through a registered sale deed dated 29.10.2009. While so, since the third respondent denied his right over the property, the petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.267 of 2010 before the Principal District Munsif Court, Valliyoor, which was dismissed on 19.10.2019. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed an appeal in A.S.No.80 of 2019 before the Sub-Court, Valliyoor and the same is pending. Though the appeal suit is pending, the third respondent have sold the property to the 4th respondent. Hence, the petitioner made a representation to the respondents 1 and 2 to take action as against the fraudulent document registered by the respondents 3 and 4, on which the impugned order came to be passed, relegating the parties to the civil Court. Challenging the same the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.
4. The respondents have not filed their counter affidavit.
5. On a perusal of the impugned order, it is seen that since a civil suit is pending between the parties, the first respondent relegated the parties to the civil Court. This Court does not see any infirmity in the said order. Mere pendency of the suit is not a bar for registration and any such transfer is always subject to the
3/6
W.P.(MD)No.23860 of 2022
result of the suit. In such view of the matter, the impugned order does not require any interference and the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed.
6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order
as to costs.
20.08.2024
NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No vsm
4/6
W.P.(MD)No.23860 of 2022
To
5/6
W.P.(MD)No.23860 of 2022
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
vsm
W.P.(MD)No.23860 of 2022
20.08.2024
6/6
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the pendency of a civil suit is a bar to the registration of a sale deed.
Whether the impugned order relegating parties to civil court in view of pending suit is infirm.
Whether writ jurisdiction can be invoked to quash an order reluctant to interfere in registration matters with civil pendency.
S.Murugan
The District Registrar, Tirunelveli District
The Sub-Registrar, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli
S.Pachai Mal @ Paulraj Nadar
Jenise Ebrayem
N.SATHISH KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
