Allowed¶35

Sekar v. The Sub Registrar

Madras HC8 Dec 2025WP(MD)/35031/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WP(MD)No.35031 of 2025; refusal check slip RFL/Sankarankovil/91/2025 dated 30.05.2025; Sub-Registrar Sankarankovil; registration of general power deed refused; land in S.No.608/2; objection by religious institution (Arulmigu Sankaranarayana Swamy Thirukovil); Section 22-A Registration Act; summary enquiry before refusal; Sudha Ravi Kumar 2017 (3) CTC 135 Division Bench directions; certiorarified mandamus; Tenkasi District; B.PUGALENDHI,J.; decided 08.12.2025; writ petition allowed, impugned order set aside, enquiry directed.

What did the court decide?

Impugned refusal check slip set aside; 1st respondent directed to conduct an enquiry and proceed further as per the Division Bench order in Sudha Ravi Kumar; no costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed. ¶35

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

¶1

WP(MD)No.35031 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 08.12.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

¶6

WP(MD)No.35031 of 2025

¶7

Sekar ...Petitioner

¶8

¶9

1.The Sub-Registrar, Sankarankovil Sub Registrar Office, Tenkasi District.

¶10

2.The Executive Officer / Deputy Commissioner Arulmigu Sankaranarayana Swamy Thirukovil,

¶11

Sankarankovil, Tenkasi District. ...Respondents

¶12

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus call for the records in the impugned check slip in RFL/Sankarankovil/91/2025 dated 30.05.2025 on the file of the 1^st respondent and consequently direct the 1^st respondent to register general power deed dated 30.05.2025 within time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kumar For Respondent : Mr.K.R.Badurus Zaman, No.1 Government Advocate For Respondent : Mr. S.Manohar No.2

¶14

1/6

¶15

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

¶16

WP(MD)No.35031 of 2025

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner has submitted a document for registration of a land in S.No.608/2 on 30.05.2025 and the same has been rejected by the 1^st respondent vide the impugned refusal check slip based on the objection raised by the 2^nd respondent. Therefore, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

¶19

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner by referring to the order passed by a Division Bench of this court in Sudha Ravi Kumar vs. The Special Commissioner, HR and CE Department, Chennai [2017 (3) CTC 135] submits that if the document presented for registration is to be rejected, it must be done by conducting summary enquiry.

¶20

3.The Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court Sudha Ravi Kumar's

¶21

case cited supra has issued certain directions as under:

¶22

“25. In view of the above discussions, all the writ petitions are allowed and the impugned orders are set aside with the following directions:

¶23

2/6

¶24

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

¶25

WP(MD)No.35031 of 2025

¶26

(i) The registering authority before whom the document has been presented shall cause service of notice on the parties to the deeds and also to the objector / religious institution, hold summary enquiry, hear the parties and then either register or refuse to register the document by passing an order having regard to the relevant facts as indicated above.

¶27

(ii) If the registering authority, refuses to register any document by accepting the objections raised under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, the aggrieved may file a statutory appeal under the Act.

¶28

(iii) If the objections raised under Section 22-A of the Act by the religious institution are rejected and the document is registered, the remedy for the religious institution is to either approach this Court by way of a writ petition seeking cancellation of the registration or for any other relief or to approach the civil Court for declaration of the title and for other consequential reliefs.

¶29

(iv) If the registering authority refuses to register the document acting on the objections raised by a religious institution under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, the parties to the deed will be at liberty to straightaway approach the Civil Court for declaration of title and other relief without availing the opportunity for filing a statutory appeal.

¶30

3/6

¶31

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

¶32

WP(MD)No.35031 of 2025

¶33

(v) We further direct that if the deed has already been registered without there being any objection by the religious institution under Section 22-A of the Act, the document shall be returned to the parties concerned leaving it open for the religious institution to approach either the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or the Civil Court for appropriate relief as indicated above. At any rate, the registering authority shall not withhold the deed which has already been registered.

¶34

(vi) Consequently the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.”

¶35

4.In view of the above directions, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The 1^st respondent is directed to conduct an enquiry and proceed further as per the above order of the Division Bench. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

08.12.2025

DSK

4/6

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

¶40

WP(MD)No.35031 of 2025

¶41

¶42