Sai Chandrasekar Vs the Sub - Registrar — Money Laundering | Madras HC (2026)

Sai Chandrasekar Vs the Sub - Registrar — Money Laundering | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Refusal Check Slip No. RFL/Marandahalli/71/2025 dated 27.10.2025 set aside; petitioner permitted to re-present the sale deed, to be registered within two weeks of re-presentation subject to other registration requirements and absence of any intervening order of attachment; no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Refusal Check Slip refusing registration of the petitioner's sale deed on the basis of a letter issued by the Joint Director, Enforcement Directorate, in the absence of any order of attachment, can be sustained.

Court's answer

Since no order of attachment has been sent to the registering officer, the impugned refusal check slip cannot be sustained and is set aside.

Ratio / Principle

As a consequence, the petitioner may re-present the sale deed for registration; unless an order of attachment is received in the meantime, the document shall be registered within two weeks from the date of re-presentation, subject to fulfilment of other registration requirements.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J.), WP No. 2186 of 2026, decided 03-02-2026: The petitioner's sale deed dated 27.10.2025 was presented for registration, but the Sub-Registrar, Marandahalli refused registration by Refusal Check Slip No. RFL/Marandahalli/71/2025 dated 27.10.2025, citing a letter dated 18.09.2025 from the Joint Director, Enforcement Directorate. The learned Government Advocate confirmed that no order of attachment had been issued under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. Applying R.Madhupriya v. Inspector General of Registration, 2020 SCC Online Madras 20112, the Court held that a request for registration cannot be refused on the basis of letters issued by authorities unless an order of attachment has been issued by a competent court and sent to the registering officer. The refusal check slip was set aside; the petitioner was permitted to re-present the sale deed, to be registered within two weeks of re-presentation subject to other registration requirements and absence of any intervening attachment order. Writ petition disposed of; no costs.

WP No. 2186 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03-02-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

WP No. 2186 of 2026

Sai Chandrasekar S/o.Late Mr.Janarthanan 1168 12A Main raod Indiranagar 2nd Stage Bangalore 560038.

..Petitioner(s)

Vs

The Sub - Registrar Marandahalli Dharmapuri District.

..Respondent(s)

PRAYER : Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, Calling for the entire records relating to and culminating in the issuance of the Refusal Check Slip / Refusal No. RFL/Marandahalli/71/2025 dated 27.10.2025 on the file of the Respondent, quash the same and consequently direct the Respondent SubRegistrar, Marandahalli, to receive and register the Sale Deed presented by the petitioner on 27.10.2025.

Page1 of 4

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

WP No. 2186 of 2026

For Petitioner(s): Mr.K.Sridhar For Respondent(s): Ms.Akila Rajendran

ORDER

Intending to sell the property owned by the petitioner and his daughter, sale deed dated 27.10.2025 was executed and presented for registration. Assailing the refusal check slip, the writ petition has been filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the refusal check slip and

pointed out that the request for registration was refused by citing letter dated 18.09.2025 from the Joint Director Enforcement Directorate. By relying on earlier order of this Court in R.Madhupriya and another v. Inspector General of Registration and another, 2020 SCC Online Madras 20112 (R.Madhupriya) , learned counsel submits that a request for registration cannot be declined by referring to a letter issued by a statutory authority.

Ms.Akila Rajendran, learned Government Advocate, accepts notice for the sole respondent. On the basis of written instructions, she confirms that no order of attachment has been issued under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

Page2 of 4

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

WP No. 2186 of 2026

In R.Madhupriya , this Court held that a request for registration cannot be refused on the basis of letters issued by the police unless an order of attachment has been issued by a competent court. Given the fact that no order of attachment has been sent to the registering officer, the impugned refusal check slip cannot be sustained. Hence, it is set aside. As a consequence, a petitioner may re-present the sale deed for registration. Subject to fulfilment of other requirements relating to registration, unless an order of attachment is received in the mean time, the document shall be registered within two weeks from the date of re-presentation.

This writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. No costs.

03-02-2026

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No RNA

To

The Sub - Registrar Marandahalli Dharmapuri District.

__________ Page3 of 4

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

WP No. 2186 of 2026

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.

RNA

WP No. 2186 of 2026

03-02-2026

__________ Page4 of 4

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