Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

A.Vanaja Vs the Inspector General of — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

Home
Madras HC
2025
A.Vanaja Vs the Inspector General ofA.Vanaja v. the Inspector General of

Allowed¶33

A.Vanaja v. the Inspector General of

Registration Act, 1908 – Section 77-A – Writ of Certiorari

Madras HC17 Sept 2025WP/26992/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Single Judge (Krishnan Ramasamy,J.), decided 17.09.2025 in W.P.No.26992 of 2025 (connected W.M.P.No.30296 of 2025). Petitioner A.Vanaja sought certiorari against order Pa.Mu.No.6496/E/2022 dated 11.08.2023 by the District Registrar, Tiruvannamalai (second respondent) under Section 77-A of the Registration Act, 1908; respondents included the Inspector General of Registration and private respondent Kalaiselvi. Both sides agreed the issue was covered by M.Kathirvel Vs. Inspector General of Registration, 2024 SCC Online Mad 6154, where the Division Bench declared Section 77-A illegal/unconstitutional, struck it down, and held it prospective. Applying that ratio, the court quashed the impugned order, allowed the writ petition with no costs, and closed the connected miscellaneous petition. Keywords: Section 77-A Registration Act quashed; M.Kathirvel 2024 SCC Online Mad 6154 followed; certiorari; District Registrar Tiruvannamalai; prospective operation.

What did the court decide?

Writ of Certiorari granted; the order in Pa.Mu.No.6496/E/2022 dated 11.08.2023 passed by the second respondent under Section 77-A of the Registration Act, 1908 quashed; no costs; connected miscellaneous petition (W.M.P.No.30296 of 2025) closed. ¶33

Why is it important?

In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in M.Kathirvel Vs. Inspector General of Registration and Others (2024 SCC Online Mad 6154), wherein Section 77-A of the Registration Act, 1908 was declared illegal and struck down, the order passed by the second respondent in Pa.Mu.No.6496/E/2022 dated 11.08.2023 under Section 77-A is liable to be quashed, and the said order is quashed. ¶32

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ of Certiorari granted; the order in Pa.Mu.No.6496/E/2022 dated 11.08.2023 passed by the second respondent under Section 77-A of the Registration Act, 1908 quashed; no costs; connected miscellaneous petition (W.M.P.No.30296 of 2025) closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 11.08.2023 in Pa.Mu.No.6496/E/2022 passed by the second respondent under Section 77-A of the Registration Act, 1908 is liable to be quashed in view of the Division Bench decision in M.Kathirvel declaring Section 77-A illegal.

Court's answer

In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in M.Kathirvel Vs. Inspector General of Registration and Others (2024 SCC Online Mad 6154), wherein Section 77-A of the Registration Act, 1908 was declared illegal and struck down, the order passed by the second respondent in Pa.Mu.No.6496/E/2022 dated 11.08.2023 under Section 77-A is liable to be quashed, and the said order is quashed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Registration Act, 1908 - Section 77-A - Writ of Certiorari - Impugned order dated 11.08.2023 in Pa.Mu.No.6496/E/2022 passed by the second respondent (District Registrar, Tiruvannamalai) under Section 77-A - Counsel ad idem that the question is no longer res-integra, being covered by the Division Bench decision in M.Kathirvel Vs. Inspector General of Registration and Others, 2024 SCC Online Mad 6154, wherein Section 77-A was held unconstitutional and liable to be struck down, and prospective in operation - Following that ratio, the impugned order under Section 77-A is held liable to be quashed and is quashed - Writ petition allowed, no costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed.

A

W.P.No.26992 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 17.09.2025

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

Writ Petition No.26992 of 2025 and W.M.P.No.30296 of 2025

A.Vanaja

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Inspector General of Registration

100, Santhome High Road, Pattinapakam,

Chennai - 600 028.

2.The District Registrar, Office of District Registrar, Tiruvannamalai.

3.The Joint Sub Registrar-II, Tiruvannamalai Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District.

4.Kalaiselvi … Respondents

Prayer:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the order made in Pa.Mu.No.6496/E/2022 dated 11.08.2023 passed by the second respondent purportedly issued under Section 77A of Registration Act and quash the same.

Page No.1 of 4

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

W.P.No.26992 of 2025

For Petitioner : M/s.M.Preetha For Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr.P.Harish, Government Advocate For Respondent 4 : Mr.N.Manokaran

ORDER

Challenge has been made against the order in Pa.Mu.No.6496/E/2022

dated 11.08.2023, passed by the second respondent under Section 77-A of the Registration Act, 1908.

When the matter was came up for hearing, learned counsel on either side submitted in unison that the subject matter of this writ petition is no longer res-integra and the same is covered by the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of M.Kathirvel Vs., Inspector General of Registration, Department of Registration and Others, reported in 2024 SCC Online Mad 6154, wherein, Section 77-A of the Registration Act, 1908 was declared as illegal and the same was struck down. For better appreciation, the relevant portion of the judgment is extracted hereunder:

“167. This Court has already held that Section 77-A is

unconstitutional and liable to be struck down. We have also

Page No.2 of 4

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

W.P.No.26992 of 2025

held that Section 77-A is prospective in operation. Therefore, we are not going into Issues [E], [F] and [G] and it is not necessary for us to go into those issues”

In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of M.Kathirvel Vs., Inspector General of Registration, Department of Registration and Others, reported in 2024 SCC Online Mad 6154 , orders passed by the second respondent in Pa.Mu.No.6496/E/2022 dated 11.08.2023 under Section 77-A of the Registration Act, 1908 is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the said order is quashed.

In the result, this writ petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.

17.09.2025

vm Index : Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY,J.

Page No.3 of 4

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

W.P.No.26992 of 2025

vm

To:

1.The Inspector General of Registration 100, Santhome High Road, Pattinapakam, Chennai - 600 028.

2.The District Registrar, Office of District Registrar, Tiruvannamalai.

3.The Joint Sub Registrar-II, Tiruvannamalai Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District.

W.P.No.26992 of 2025

17.09.2025

Page No.4 of 4

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

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the order dated 11.08.2023 in Pa.Mu.No.6496/E/2022 passed by the second respondent under Section 77-A of the Registration Act, 1908 is liable to be quashed in view of the Division Bench decision in M.Kathirvel declaring Section 77-A illegal.medium confidence¶32
The court held
In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in M.Kathirvel Vs. Inspector General of Registration and Others (2024 SCC Online Mad 6154), wherein Section 77-A of the Registration Act, 1908 was declared illegal and struck down, the order passed by the second respondent in Pa.Mu.No.6496/E/2022 dated 11.08.2023 under Section 77-A is liable to be quashed, and the said order is quashed.ratio¶32

Cases cited

Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority

AI extract

M.Kathirvel Vs., Inspector General of Registration, Department of Registration and OthersFollowed¶25
2024 SCC Online Mad 6154 · Who else cites this

Statutes considered

3 provisions across 2 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226¶17
Registration Act, 190877A¶17 77-A¶24

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order made in Pa.Mu.No.6496/E/2022 dated 11.08.2023 passed by the second respondent purportedly under Section 77-A of the Registration Act, 1908; challenged by writ of certiorari.¶24
Second respondent - The District Registrar, Tiruvannamalai · 11.08.2023

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
A.Vanaja¶7
M/s.M.Preetha
respondent
The Inspector General of Registration¶10
Mr.P.Harish
respondent
The District Registrar, Office of District Registrar, Tiruvannamalai¶13
Mr.P.Harish
respondent
The Joint Sub Registrar-II, Tiruvannamalai Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District¶14
Mr.P.Harish
respondent
Kalaiselvi¶15
Mr.N.Manokaran

Coram

AI extract

Krishnan Ramasamyauthor¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 17 Sept 2025 · September
Registered: 19 Jul 2025
Case no.: WP/26992/2025
CNR: HCMA011515032025
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: Krishnan Ramasamy
Disposal: ALLOWED
Case type: Writ Petition

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Krishnan Ramasamy

A.Shankar Vs the District Collector
16 Sept 2025
S.Mary Stella Vs the Collector
16 Sept 2025
S.Mary Stella Vs the Collector
16 Sept 2025
R.Prakash Vs the Inspector General of Registration
17 Sept 2025
Kousalya Vs the Inspector General of Registration
17 Sept 2025
S.Suresh Kumar Vs the District Collector
17 Sept 2025

Cite this judgement

A.Vanaja v. the Inspector General of, WP/26992/2025 (MAD), decided on 17 September 2025.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Cases cited1

M.Kathirvel Vs., Inspector General of Registration, Department of Registration and OthersFollowed¶25

Open Authorities

Statutes3

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226
Registration Act, 190877A · 77-A

View all statutes

Procedural history1

Order made in Pa.Mu.No.6496/E/2022 dated 11.08.2023 passed by the second respondent purportedly under Section 77-A of the Registration Act, 1908; challenged by writ of certiorari.Second respondent - The District Registrar, Tiruvannamalai · 11.08.2023

View full history

Bench / Coram

Krishnan Ramasamy

Parties & counsel