Disposed¶29

E.Kannabiran v. the Inspector General of Registration

Madras HC22 Jan 2026WP/50686/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Registration Act 1908 Sections 77A 77B 68(2) unconstitutional; registering officer has no power to cancel registered instrument; cancellation of sale deeds Documents Nos.1004/25 and 1005/2025; protest petition; fraudulent legal heirship certificate; remedy lies before jurisdictional civil court; writ of certiorarified mandamus under Article 226 Constitution of India; impugned proceedings Na.Ka.No. 2855/AA3/2025 dated 6.10.2025; Inspector General of Registration; District Registrar (Admin) Thirupathur; Sub-Registrar Jolarpet; Madras High Court; disposed without costs.

What did the court decide?

None; the writ petition was disposed of without any order as to costs, leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional civil court. ¶29

E.Kannabiran Vs the Inspector General of Registration — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

WP No. 50686 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 22-01-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

¶6

WP No. 50686 of 2025

¶7

E.Kannabiran, S/o. Late. Elumalai, No. 9/7, Jeeva Street, Sri Devi Nagar, Kamaraja Nagar, Avadi, Chennai 71.

¶8

..Petitioner

¶9

¶10

The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome, Chennai District.

¶11

The District Registrar (Admin), Office at Thirupathur, Tirupathur District.

¶12

The Sub-Registrar, Office of Jolarpet, Thirupathur, Thirupathur District.

¶13

M.Naveen, S/o. Murugesan, No.17, Bajanai Koil Street, Melachamangalam Village, Thirupathur Taluk, Thirupathur District.

¶14

..Respondents

¶15

Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent herein to call for the records vide proceedings Na.Ka.No. 2855/ AA3/2025 dated 6.10.2025 and quash the same and consequently cancel the sale deeds vide Documents Nos.1004/25 and 1005/2025 on the file of the 3rd respondent herein.

¶16

Page 1 of 4

¶17

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

¶18

WP No. 50686 of 2025

¶19

For Petitioner: Mr.R.Ramesh For Respondents: Mr.Stalin Abimanyu, Addl. Govt. Pleader for R1 to R3

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Upon coming to know of the registration of document nos.1004/2025 and 1005/2025, the petitioner has presented this writ petition seeking cancellation of the said documents.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a legal heirship certificate was obtained fraudulently by his brothers and that the fourth respondent herein purchased the property under the above mentioned registered documents. Because the said documents were registered by the registering officer notwithstanding the protest petition of the petitioner, he submits that the said documents are liable to be cancelled.

¶23

Mr.Stalin Abimanyu, learned Additional Government Pleader, accepts

¶24

notice for respondents 1 to 3. He points out that the impugned order was issued in view of Sections 77A , 77B and 68(2) of the Registration Act, 1908 being held to be unconstitutional. Therefore, he submits that there is no infirmity in

¶25

the impugned order.

¶26

Page 2 of 4

¶27

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

¶28

WP No. 50686 of 2025

¶29

As correctly pointed out on behalf of the official respondents, the registering officer does not have the power to cancel a registered instrument. If the petitioner is of the view that the vendor did not have title to the relevant property and could not have conveyed the same to the purchaser, the appropriate remedy would be for the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional civil court. By leaving it open to the petitioner to do so, this writ petition is disposed of without any order as to costs.

¶30

22-01-2026

¶31

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

¶32

¶33

¶34