Dismissed¶27

Rajamani v. The Sub Registrar

Madras HC30 Oct 2025WP(MD)/30583/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

W.P(MD)No.30583 of 2025; Madras High Court Madurai Bench; Justice G.R. Swaminathan; decision date 30.10.2025; writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India; Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus; Refusal Check Slip RFL/Kanakiliyanallur/73/2025 dated 14.10.2025; Sub Registrar Kanakiliyanallur Trichy District; refusal to register cancellation deed; unilateral cancellation not permissible; settlement deed dated 23.10.2024 Document No.2058/2024; minor Kiruthik; guardian Anand; property of minor cannot be alienated without permission of the Court; writ petition dismissed, no costs.

What did the court decide?

This is not a case of unilateral cancellation, because in the cancellation deed not only the petitioner but also her son Anand, the guardian of the minor, had put their signatures. ¶21

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned Refusal Check Slip in RFL/Kanakiliyanallur/73/2025 dated 14.10.2025 refusing registration of the cancellation deed should be quashed and the respondent directed to register the Document dated 14.10.2025 presented by the petitioner. +2 more

¶11

Ratio / Principle

This is not a case of unilateral cancellation, because in the cancellation deed not only the petitioner but also her son Anand, the guardian of the minor, had put their signatures.

¶21

Key takeaways

Once the settlement deed was executed, the property became the property of the minor child and, without the permission of the Court, it cannot be alienated; the petitioner admittedly did not obtain any such permission, so the property of the minor cannot be dealt with by the writ petitioner and relief is declined.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), G.R. Swaminathan, J. [30.10.2025]: Writ petition under Article 226 by Rajamani seeking a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the Refusal Check Slip in RFL/Kanakiliyanallur/73/2025 dated 14.10.2025 issued by the Sub Registrar, Kanakiliyanallur, Trichy District, who had declined to register a cancellation deed on the ground that unilateral cancellation is not permissible. The cancellation deed sought to cancel a settlement deed dated 23.10.2024 (registered as Document No.2058/2024) executed by the petitioner in favour of her grandson, minor Kiruthik. The court held that the case was not one of unilateral cancellation since the petitioner's son Anand, guardian of the minor, had also signed the cancellation deed; however, it held that once the settlement deed was executed the property became the property of the minor and could not be alienated without the permission of the Court, which the petitioner admittedly had not obtained. As the property of the minor could not be dealt with by the writ petitioner, relief was declined and the writ petition was dismissed without costs.

¶1

W.P(MD)No.30583 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 30.10.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P(MD)No.30583 of 2025

Rajamani

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar Office, Kanakiliyanallur, Trichy District.

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned Refusal Check Slip in RFL/Kanakiliyanallur/73/2025, dated 14.10.2025 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to register the Document dated 14.10.2025, presented by the petitioner, within the time that may be stipulated by this Court.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Rameshkumar

¶13

For Respondent : Mr.S.Shanmugavel Additional Government Pleader

¶14

1/4

¶15

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

¶16

W.P(MD)No.30583 of 2025

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Heard both sides.

¶19

2.The petitioner executed settlement deed dated 23.10.2024 in favour of her grandson, minor Kiruthik. The document was registered as Document No.2058/2024. To cancel the same, a cancellation deed was presented. The registering authority declined to register the same on the ground that unilateral cancellation is not permissible. Challenging the stand of the authority, this writ petition came to be filed.

¶20

3.The learned counsel for the writ petitioner points out that the case on hand is not one of unilateral cancellation. He pointed out that in the cancellation deed, not only the petitioner but also her son Anand, the guardian of the minor son, had put their signatures.

¶21

4.I am satisfied that this is not a case of unilateral cancellation.

¶22

But there is one herculean impediment for the petitioner. Once the settlement deed was executed, the property became the property of the

¶23

2/4

¶24

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

¶25

W.P(MD)No.30583 of 2025

¶26

minor child. Thereafter, without the permission of the Court, it cannot be alienated. Admittedly, the petitioner has not obtained any such permission. Since the property of the minor cannot be dealt with by the writ petitioner, I decline to grant relief.

¶27

5.This Writ Petition is dismissed accordingly. No costs.

¶28

30.10.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No MGA

¶29

¶30

The Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar Office, Kanakiliyanallur, Trichy District.

¶31

3/4

¶32

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

¶33