Allowed

A. Ramapandi v. The District Registrar

Madras HC12 Sept 2025WP(MD)/24553/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court quashed a check slip refusing registration of a sale deed because the revenue record misclassified the property as a water body. The court noted conflicting evidence and directed the authority to register the document.

What did the court decide?

The impugned check slip is quashed; petitioners permitted to re-present the document for registration subject to usual formalities.

A. Ramapandi Vs The District Registrar — Property and Title | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

1 W.P.(MD)No.24553 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 12.09.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.24553 of 2025 and

¶7

WMP(MD)No.19261 of 2025

¶8

1.A.Ramapandi

¶9

2.R.Sathish Kumar ... Petitioners

¶10

Vs.

¶11

1.The District Registrar, Sivagangai Registration Department, Sivagangai.

¶12

2.The Sub Registrar, Paramakudi Town, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District. ... Respondents

¶13

Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus challenging the impugned refusal check slip in RFL/Paramakudi/18/2025 dated 26.02.2025 issued by the 2^nd respondent it is illegal and quash the same consequently direct the 2^nd respondent to register the sale deed produced by the petitioner dated 01.02.2025.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Mathan Kumar

¶15

1/4

¶16

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

¶17

2 W.P.(MD)No.24553 of 2025

¶18

For Respondents : Mr.D.Gandhiraj Special Government Pleader

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The petitioners want to sell the petition mentioned plot of land. The sale deed executed by the petitioners was presented for registration. The registering authority declined to register the document on the ground that in the “A” Registrar, the property has been shown as Water Body. Challenging the same, this writ petition has been filed.

¶21

2.I directed the learned Additional Government Pleader to

¶22

produce the relevant revenue record. It is true that in the “A” Registrar, the property has been classified as water body. But even in the said record, the name of one Abdul Rasaq was shown as pattadhar. In the subsequent Town Survey Register, the names of the petitioners are mentioned as land owners. It is too obvious that the water body has lost its character long back. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it has been stated that the petitioners are purchasers of the said land and their sale deeds were also duly registered.

¶23

2/4

¶24

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

¶25

3 W.P.(MD)No.24553 of 2025

¶26

3.I am therefore of the view that the impugned check slip has

¶27

to be quashed. It is accordingly quashed. The petitioners are permitted to re-present the document in question. It shall be received, registered and released by the registering authority subject to the fulfillment of the other usual formalities. This writ petition is allowed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶28

12.09.2025

¶29

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No SKM

¶30

To:

¶31

1.The District Registrar, Sivagangai Registration Department, Sivagangai.

¶32

2.The Sub Registrar, Paramakudi Town, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.

¶33

3/4

¶34

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

¶35

4 W.P.(MD)No.24553 of 2025

¶36

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

¶37

SKM

¶38

W.P.(MD)No.24553 of 2025 and WMP(MD)No.19261 of 2025

¶39

12.09.2025

¶40

4/4

¶41

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

A. Ramapandi v. The District Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A. Ramapandi 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A.Asai Vs The Inspector General of Registration

M/s. Saravana Traders Vs The Assistant Commissioner (St) (Fac)

Prem Anand Vs The Thasildar

Apollo Medicals Vs The State Tax Officer Fac

Chittammal Vs The Sub-Registrar

Tvl. Rajendran Ashok Kumar Vs The Commercial Tax Officer