Disposed

Saravanan v. The Inspector General of Registration

Madras HC10 Dec 2025WP(MD)/35319/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a mandamus directing the Inspector General of Registration to consider his representation for cancellation of an allegedly fraudulent sale deed registered in 2016. The court, without expressing any opinion on merits, directed the first respondent to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders on merits within eight weeks.

What the court decided

AI extract

Saravanan Vs The Inspector General of Registration — Property and Title | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.35319 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 10.12.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.35319 of 2025 and

¶7

W.M.P.(MD).No.28010 of 2025

Saravanan

... Petitioner

The Inspector General of Registration, Registration Department, Santhome High Road, Chennai 600 004.

¶12

The District Registrar, District Registrar Office, Ariyalur Post and Taluk, Ariyalur District.

¶13

The District Collector, District Collector Office, Tiruchirappalli District.

¶14

The Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Thuraiyur Post and Taluk, Tiruchirappalli District.

¶15

The Sub Registrar, Sub Registrar Office, Thuraiyur Post and Taluk, Tiruchirappalli District.

¶16

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.(MD) No.35319 of 2025

¶19

Gomathy ... Respondents

¶20

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 01.12.2025, which is pending before the first respondent and further to cancel the fraudulent sale deed dated 08.07.2016 registered as Document No.3978/2016.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.R.N.Kasi Vishwanathan For R-1 to R-5 : Mr.V.Om Prakash, Government Advocate

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 01.12.2025, which is pending before the first respondent and further to cancel the fraudulent sale deed dated 08.07.2016 registered as Document No.3978/2016.

¶24

2 . The grievance of the petitioner is that the husband of the sixth respondent, by using the forged sale deed, has obstructed the pathway and encroached the eastern part of the petitioner's property. Hence, the petitioner made a representation to the first respondent to cancel the 2/5

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.(MD) No.35319 of 2025

¶27

forged sale deed dated 08.07.2016 registered as Document No.3978/2016. But till date, no action has been taken. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

¶28

3 . The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 5 submits that the petitioner’s representation dated 01.12.2025 will be considered in accordance with law.

¶29

4 . In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, this Court directs the first respondent to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 01.12.2025 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶30

5 . With the above directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶31

There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶32

10.12.2025

¶33

Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No TSG

¶34

3/5

¶35

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

¶36

W.P.(MD) No.35319 of 2025

¶37

¶38

The Inspector General of Registration, Registration Department, Santhome High Road, Chennai 600 004.

¶39

The District Registrar, District Registrar Office, Ariyalur Post and Taluk, Ariyalur District.

¶40

The District Collector, District Collector Office, Tiruchirappalli District.

¶41

The Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Thuraiyur Post and Taluk, Tiruchirappalli District.

¶42

The Sub Registrar, Sub Registrar Office, Thuraiyur Post and Taluk, Tiruchirappalli District.

¶43

4/5

¶44

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

¶45

W.P.(MD) No.35319 of 2025

¶46

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

¶47

TSG

¶48

W.P.(MD)No.35319 of 2025

¶49

10.12.2025

¶50

5/5

¶51

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

Saravanan v. The Inspector General of Registration

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Saravanan v. The Inspector General of Registration

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Janaki Vs The Sub Registrar

R.Pravinkumar Vs The Sub Registrar

Tvl.Aruna Maligai, Vs the Deputy State Tax Officer - I (St)

Palanisamy Kc Vs The Commissioner

Tvl. Fancy Agency Vs The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1

Sheik Mansoor Vs The Sub Registrar