Disposed

Subramani v. The District Registrar

Madras HC10 Jul 2025WP(MD)/13227/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed to direct the Registrar to register a General Power of Attorney. Court allowed registration conditioned on the Power of Attorney mentioning the petitioner holds only an undivided share to avoid prejudicing pending civil suit disputes over property title.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to register the Power of Attorney by mentioning entitlement to only the undivided share in the property.

Subramani Vs The District Registrar — Property and Title | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.13227 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 10.07.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

¶6

W.P(MD)No.13227 of 2025

¶7

Subramani ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs. 1.The District Registrar, Ramanathapuram District. Ramanathapuram.

¶9

2.The Sub Registrar, Velipattinam Sub Registrar Office, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

¶10

3.Jothi Murugan ...Respondents

¶11

(R3 is suo motu impleaded vide Court order, dated 30.04.2025, in W.P.(MD)No. 13227 to 13229 of 2025)

¶12

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 2nd respondent to register the General Power of Attorney Deed in Document No.TP/215730704/2025 presented on 05.04.2025 by the petitioner and other 5 joint owners forthwith.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Radhakrishnan For R1 to R2 : Mr.D.Sasi Kumar Special Government Pleader For R3 : Mr.K.Navaneetharaja

¶14

1/5

¶15

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

¶16

W.P(MD)No.13227 of 2025

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 2nd respondent to register the General Power of Attorney Deed in Document No.TP/215730704/2025 presented on 05.04.2025 by the petitioner and other 5 joint owners forthwith .

¶19

2.There are 4 children, ie., 3 daughters and 1 son. Without giving share to the daughters, the son has taken the entire portion which was questioned in a suit. Now, the petitioner, one of the legal heir of the daughter, is intended to execute a registered Power of Attorney and the same is objected by the third respondent.

¶20

3.The contention of the third respondent is that he is tracing the title through the son. He has a registered sale deed in his favor. The sale deed was put to challenge in the suit and the sale was set aside and declared as null and void in the suit. Against which the third respondent's vendor has preferred an appeal and the same is pending.

¶21

4.The above narrated facts would clearly indicate that there are 4 sharers in the said property. The total extent of the property is 1 acre 80 cents. If the 4 shares are divided among themselves, the 3 daughters will be entitled to 1

¶22

2/5

¶23

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

¶24

W.P(MD)No.13227 of 2025

¶25

acre 35 cents and the son will be entitled to 45 cents. The petitioner is trying to

¶26

register the Power of Attorney based on the co-share which is being traced by the daughters. Therefore, there will not be any impediment if it is registered as undivided share, which the daughters are entitled to.

¶27

5.Therefore, the petitioner is directed to register the Power of Attorney by mentioning that the petitioner is entitled to only the undivided share in the said property. With this condition, the official respondents shall entertain the Power of Attorney and register it in accordance to law. The above observation is made to decide the issue raised in the present writ petition alone. It is made clear that the said observation will not be an impediment for the rights of the parties raised in the civil suit.

¶28

6.With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶29

10.07.2025 NCC : Yes / No (1/3) Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes

¶30

Tmg

¶31

3/5

¶32

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

¶33

W.P(MD)No.13227 of 2025

¶34

¶35

1.The District Registrar Ramanathapuram District. Ramanathapuram.

¶36

2.The Sub Registrar, Velipattinam Sub Registrar Office, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

¶37

4/5

¶38

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

¶39

W.P(MD)No.13227 of 2025

¶40

S.SRIMATHY, J.

¶41

Tmg

¶42

ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.13227 of 2025

¶43

DATED : 10.07.2025 (1/3)

¶44

5/5

¶45

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

Subramani v. The District Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subramani v. The District Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.Jothika Vs The Sub Registrar

Kumar Sr Vs The Inspector of General of Registration

Vallitheivanai Vs The Commissioner

Alangaram Vs The District Registrar

Poomani Vs The Dean

Ravindran Vs The Secretary