Quashed

Tamilselvi v. The Sub Registrar

Madras HC9 Jul 2026WP(MD)/19215/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court quashed a refusal check slip preventing the registration of a sale deed for an unapproved layout. The court directed registration conditioned on the applicant filing an affidavit undertaking not to change land use or claim utility connections without planning authority permission.

What did the court decide?

The impugned Refusal Check Slip was quashed and the petitioner was directed to effect changes in the property description and file a notarized affidavit undertaking regarding non-use and utility conne

Tamilselvi Vs The Sub Registrar — Property and Title | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.19215 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 09.07.2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.19215 of 2026

¶7

Tamilselvi ... Petitioner Vs. The Sub Registrar, Kottaram Sub Registrar Office, Kottaram, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondent

¶8

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire records pertaining to the impugned refusal check slip issued by the respondent in RFL/Kottaram/195/2026 dated 01.07.2026 and to quash the same as unconstitutional and illegal, consequently directing the respondent to register the sale deed document dated 16.06.2026 forthwith.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Senthil Kumar

¶10

For Respondent : Mr.R.Parthiban Government Standing Counsel ORDER

¶11

The petitioner is before this Court challenging the impugned

¶12

Refusal Check Slip dated 01.07.2026, whereby the respondent declined to register the Sale Deed dated 16.06.2026.

¶13

Page No. 1 of 8

¶14

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

¶15

W.P.(MD) No.19215 of 2026

¶16

The reasons stated in the impugned Refusal Check Slip dated

¶17

01.07.2026 are extracted hereunder:

¶18

Page No. 2 of 8

¶19

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

¶20

W.P.(MD) No.19215 of 2026

¶21

____________ Page No. 3 of 8_

¶22

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

¶23

W.P.(MD) No.19215 of 2026

¶24

It appears that the property in question is an unapproved layout.

¶25

Therefore, the registration of the the Sale Deed dated 16.06.2026 would be clearly contrary to Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, as inserted by Tamil Nadu Act No.28 of 2012, dated 21.06.2012, with effect from 20.10.2016.

¶26

Taking note of a piquant situation arising out of the strict implementation of Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, this Court, in its order dated 28.04.2026 in W.P.(MD) No.3111 of 2026 in the case of P.Chellakily vs. The Sub-Registrar, O/o. The Sub-Registrar, Kottaram, Agastheeswaram, Kanyakumari District – 629 703 , recognized the constitutional right to property enshrined under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and directed the claimant, in whom title vests under the document, to execute an affidavit containing the requisite undertaking and to comply with the further conditions stipulated in the said order dated 28.04.2026 in W.P.(MD) No.3111 of 2026, which are extracted hereunder:

¶27

i. The impugned order shall stand set aside.

¶28

ii. The claimant under the document refused for registration, in whose name the property vests, shall execute a duly

¶29

Page No. 4 of 8

¶30

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

¶31

W.P.(MD) No.19215 of 2026

¶32

notarised affidavit in four sets and file one set before this Court within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the web copy of this Order. Only upon filing of the same, a certified copy of this Order shall be issued to the petitioner.

¶33

iii. Along with the certified copy of the Order of this Court, the petitioner will be entitled to represent the document along with three sets of affidavits.

¶34

iv. Upon representation, the document shall be registered if there is no other impediment.

¶35

v. Along with the document, the affidavit filed shall also be scanned and uploaded.

¶36

vi. The two other sets shall be dispatched to the local authority and the jurisdictional Assistant Engineer of TANGEDCO concerned, who shall at all times consider the aforesaid undertaking and act accordingly.

¶37

vii.If the petitioner fails to file an affidavit as directed within four weeks of receipt of the web copy of this Order, the writ petition shall stand dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶38

viii.No costs.

¶39

____________ Page No. 5 of 8_

¶40

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

¶41

W.P.(MD) No.19215 of 2026

¶42

The requisite undertaking, which has to be contained in the affidavit, is as follows:

¶43

''I/We, .................., S/o. / D/o. / W/o. / H/o. G/o. .................., residing at .................., hereby undertake that I/We will not use the property as a residential or commercial site or for any other purpose involving a change of user unless due permission is obtained from the planning authority. Without such approval, I/We will not develop the site by changing its use or put up any residential or commercial building. I/We am/are aware that I/We may be liable for punishment for contempt of Court in the event of violating this undertaking. I/We am/are also aware that I/We shall not be entitled to claim electricity, water, sewerage or any other connection or service from the local authority or any other authority unless the due conversion is effected in accordance with the permission granted by the planning authority.''

¶44

If the transferee agrees with the above stipulation, I see no reason to take a different view in the matter.

¶45

____________ Page No. 6 of 8_

¶46

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

¶47

W.P.(MD) No.19215 of 2026

¶48

Accordingly, the impugned Refusal Check Slip is quashed and

¶49

this Writ Petition stands disposed of, subject to the above stipulation. It is further made clear that the petitioner shall not put up any construction without obtaining approval from the planning authority for conversion of the site for residential or commercial use, in accordance with law. In case any such construction is put up, the authorities under the relevant statute are entitled to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶50

At this juncture, it is informed by the learned Standing Counsel

¶51

for the respondent that the description of the property has been wrongly mentioned in the Sale Deed. Therefore, the petitioner is also directed to effect necessary changes in the description of the property.

¶52

NCC : Yes / No smn2 To

¶53

09.07.2026

¶54

The Sub Registrar, Kottaram Sub Registrar Office, Kottaram, Kanyakumari District.

¶55

Page No. 7 of 8

¶56

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

¶57

W.P.(MD) No.19215 of 2026

¶58

C.SARAVANAN, J.

¶59

smn2

¶60

W.P.(MD) No.19215 of 2026

¶61

09.07.2026

¶62

____________ Page No. 8 of 8_

¶63

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

Tamilselvi v. The Sub Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tamilselvi v. The Sub Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Haseena, Vs Thenmozhi

Vishwanathan, Vs The District Collector

G.Chandra Bose, Vs The Sub Registrar

Saraswathi, Vs The District Collector

P.Ponnusamy Vs The Chairman cum District Collector

Kavitha Vs The Principal Secretary to Government