Disposed¶26

Rengasamy v. The Sub Registrar

Madras HC8 Aug 2025WP(MD)/17452/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Refusal to register Will on ground of temple property; Sub Registrar Kulithalai, Karur District; refusal slip TP/179567733/2024 dated 12.04.2024; duty to conduct enquiry calling petitioner and temple before passing orders; Sudha Ravi Kumar v. Special Commissioner, W.P.Nos.30589 of 2013 and batch, 05.04.2017; Article 226 Constitution of India; Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus; W.P(MD)No.17452 of 2024; disposed with direction to enquire and pass orders per law.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition disposed of with a direction to the respondent to conduct an enquiry and pass orders in accordance with law; no order as to costs. ¶26

Rengasamy Vs The Sub Registrar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.17452 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 08.08.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

¶6

W.P(MD)No.17452 of 2024

Rengasamy

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar, Kulithalai,

¶11

Karur District. ...Respondent

¶12

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned refusal slip in TP/179567733/2024 dated 12.04.2024 issued by the respondent and tp quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to direct the respondent to register the Will presented by the petitioner for registration within the time fixed by this Court.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.M. Karunanithi

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.S.Saji Bino Special Government Pleader

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ

¶17

of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned refusal slip in

¶18

1/4

¶19

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

¶20

W.P(MD)No.17452 of 2024

¶21

TP/179567733/2024 dated 12.04.2024 issued by the respondent and consequently,

¶22

to direct the respondent to register the Will presented by the petitioner for registration within the time fixed by this Court.

¶23

2.The contention of the petitioner is that the land originally belonged to his ancestors. When the petitioner submitted a Will before the respondent for registration, the respondent refused to register the same stating that it is temple property.

¶24

3.When it is temple property, the respondent is bound to conduct enquiry by calling the petitioner as well as temple and then pass orders as per the order passed in the case of Sudha Ravi Kumar and Another Vs. The Special Commissioner and Others in W.P.Nos.30589 of 2013 and batch, dated 05.04.2017.

¶25

4.Therefore, the respondent is directed to conduct an enquiry and pass orders in accordance to law.

¶26

5.With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶27

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶28

08.08.2025

¶29

2/4

¶30

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