Disposed

Sajjan Raj Vardhan S v. The Inspector General of Registration

Madras HC9 Jun 2025WP(MD)/13376/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought cancellation of an allegedly bogus power of attorney and sale deed registration and a refusal check slip. The Court directed registration for survey numbers not connected to respondents, while petitioners were left to pursue their remedy for the disputed survey numbers.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to consider and register listed survey numbers except 8/1, 8/2 and 8/3; refusal slip to be verified/corrected for those numbers.

Sajjan Raj Vardhan S Vs The Inspector General of… — Property and Title | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.13376 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 09.06.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

¶6

W.P(MD) No.13376 of 2025

¶7

S.Sajjan Raj Vardhan

¶8

P.Jain Devendra Kumar

¶9

B.Kantilal

¶10

Siddharth Metha ... Petitioners

¶11

Vs.

¶12

The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhom High Road, Mullima Nagar, Mandhavelipakkam, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai - 600 028.

¶13

The District Registrar, Melur Road, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

¶14

The Sub Registrar, Manamadurai Sub Registrar Office, Manamadurai, Sivagangai District.

¶15

R.Gandhi

¶16

Page No. 1 of 6

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.(MD) No.13376 of 2025

¶19

5. S.Jeyarani

¶20

V.Lakshmi

¶21

N.Kathar

¶22

Sashi Prakash Lohia

¶23

Rekha Rani

¶24

R.Kamaraj Pandian ... Respondents

¶25

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2^nd respondent herein to pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioners dated 12.03.2025 and 23.04.2025 to cancel the bogus 2^nd registration of General Power of Attorney in Document No.245/2007, dated 18.06.2007 and registered sale deed in Document No.1530/2007 dated 20.06.2007 in respect of the property bearing S.Nos.8/1, 8/2 and 8/3 of total extent of 13 acres situate at Keelapidavur Village, K.Konthagan Perunkarai Group, Sivagangai Taluk, Sivagangai District, having belonged to the petitioners based on the petitioners sale deed in Document Nos.1672/1994 and 1007/1994 both dated 12.09.1994 and to cancel the refusal check slip No.RFL/Manamadurai/Book 2/1, Refusal Order P7/2025, issued by the 3^rd respondent dated 25.02.2025.

¶26

For Petitioners : Mr.A.Sekar

¶27

For R1 to R3 : Mr.S.Kameswaran Government Advocate

¶28

____________ Page No. 2 of 6_

¶29

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

¶30

W.P.(MD) No.13376 of 2025

¶31

O R D E R

¶32

The present writ petition is filed for mandamus directing the 2 nd respondent to pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioners dated 12.03.2025 and 23.04.2025 to cancel the bogus 2nd registration of general power of attorney in Document No.245/2007, dated 18.06.2007 and registered sale deed in Document No.1530/2007 dated 20.06.2007 in respect of the property bearing Survey Nos.8/1, 8/2

¶33

and 8/3 of total extent of 13 acres situate at Keelapidavur Village, K.Konthagan Perunkarai Group, Sivagangai Taluk, Sivagangai District, belonged to the petitioners based on the petitioners sale deed in Document Nos.1672/1994 and 1007/1994, dated 12.09.1994 and to cancel the Refusal Check Slip No.RFL/Manamadurai/Book 2/1, Refusal Order P7/2025, issued by the 3 rd respondent dated 25.02.2025.

¶34

2. The contention of the petitioners is that the respondent being a Sub Registrar Office is not entitled to go into the title of the properties. It is settled proposition that the title cannot be verified by the SubRegistrar. However, it is seen that the 4 th and 6 th respondents are the vendors to the petitioners and the said 4 th and 6 th respondents have sold some of the properties in Survey Nos.8/1, 8/2 and 8/3 to third parties.

¶35

Page No. 3 of 6

¶36

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

¶37

W.P.(MD) No.13376 of 2025

¶38

Therefore, there is a rival claim to the said properties. But the impugned refusal slip states several survey numbers including the Survey Nos.8/1, 8/2 and 8/3. As far as the other survey numbers are concerned, the respondents are no way connected with the said survey numbers including the respondents no.4 and 6. Therefore, this Court directing the respondents to verify whether the other survey numbers do not belong to the respondents, if it is so, the refusal slip is erroneous. The respondents are directed to consider and register the land in Survey No.100/2B, 7/1, 7/10, 7/11, 7/12, 7/13, 7/2, 7/3, 7/4, 7/5, 7/6, 7/7, 7/8, 7/9, 8/4, 1/1, 1/2, 10, 11/2, 12/1, 13, 14, 2/1, 2/2, 23/2, 3/1, 3/2, 4/2, 5/1, 6 and 9, except the Survey Nos.8/1, 8/2 and 8/3, as per the law. As far as the Survey Nos. 8/1, 8/2 and 8/3 are concerned, the petitioners are directed to workout their remedy as per the law.

¶39

With this direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶40

09.06.2025

¶41

Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No mac

¶42

Page No. 4 of 6

¶43

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

¶44

W.P.(MD) No.13376 of 2025

¶45

¶46

The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhom High Road, Mullima Nagar, Mandhavelipakkam, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai - 600 028.

¶47

The District Registrar, Melur Road, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

¶48

The Sub Registrar, Manamadurai Sub Registrar Office, Manamadurai, Sivagangai District.

¶49

Page No. 5 of 6

¶50

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

¶51

W.P.(MD) No.13376 of 2025

¶52

S.SRIMATHY , J.

¶53

Mac

¶54

W.P(MD) No.13376 of 2025

¶55

09.06.2025

¶56

Page No. 6 of 6

¶57

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

Sajjan Raj Vardhan S v. The Inspector General of Registration

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sajjan Raj Vardhan S v. The Inspector General of Registration

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

Bala Manikandan Vs Reserve Bank of India

Poothathurai Sree Kandan Sastha Koil Seava Sangam Vs The District Collector

Chinnalapatti Devangar Mahajana Sabai Vs The Inspector General of Registration

Velmurugan K Vs The District Collector

Thandapani Vs The Sub Registrar

Radha N Vs The District Collector