Suchetha Vs The District Registrar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

Suchetha Vs The District Registrar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned refusal check slip set aside; case remitted to the second respondent for a fresh order in accordance with law after issuing notice to the aggrieved party; respondents to proceed further in accordance with law if no cancellation document is produced; no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned refusal check slip issued by the second respondent declining registration of the sale deed dated 22.06.2026 presented by the petitioner is liable to be quashed as illegal. +1 more

Court's answer

The impugned refusal check slip declining to register the sale deed dated 22.06.2026 executed in favour of the petitioner is liable to be set aside and is accordingly set aside.

Ratio / Principle

The case is remitted to the second respondent to pass a fresh order in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, after issuing notice to the aggrieved party who presented a protest letter dated 23.05.2026.

Key takeaways

It is for the person claiming ownership to produce necessary documents substantiating that the power earlier granted to the petitioner was cancelled.ratio¶27
If the person is unable to produce any document in respect of cancellation of the power deed granted in favour of the petitioner, the respondents are directed to proceed with the case further in accordance with law.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Registration - Refusal check slip - Writ of certiorarified mandamus under Article 226 - The Sub-Registrar, North Veeranallur (Tirunelveli) declined to register a sale deed dated 22.06.2026 executed in favour of the petitioner by the power of attorney holder of the vendor, against the backdrop of a protest letter dated 23.05.2026 lodged by a claimant of ownership. The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court (C.Saravanan, J.), disposing of the writ petition at admission, set aside the refusal check slip (Ref.No.RFL/North Veeranallur/50/2026 dated 22.06.2026) and remitted the matter to the second respondent for a fresh order in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, after issuing notice to the aggrieved party. The Court held that it is for the person claiming ownership to produce necessary documents substantiating that the power earlier granted to the petitioner was cancelled; if no such document of cancellation is produced, the respondents are to proceed further in accordance with law. Writ petition allowed; no costs.

W.P.(MD) No.19930 of 2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 15.07.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

W.P.(MD) No.19930 of 2026

Suchetha

... Petitioner

/vs./

1.The District Registrar O/o.District Registrar Tirunelveli District.

2.The Sub-Registrar O/o.Sub Registrar North Veeranallur Taluk Tirunelveli District. ... Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned refusal check slip issued by the 2nd respondent vide RFL/North Veeranallur/50/2026 dated 22.06.2026 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to register the sale deed dated 22.06.2026 presented by the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Sankar

For Respondents : Ms.Sudarkodi Natchiyar counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu

1/5

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

W.P.(MD) No.19930 of 2026

ORDER

Ms.Sudarkodi Natchiyar, learned counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu, takes notice for the respondents.

2.This writ petition is disposed of at the time of admission after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

3.The petitioner has challenged the impugned refusal check slip issued by the second respondent bearing Ref.No.RFL/North Veeranallur/50/2026 dated 22.06.2026.

4.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the impugned refusal check slip, declining to register the sale deed dated 22.06.2026 executed in favour of the petitioner, namely, Suchetha, by the power of attorney holder of the vendor, namely, Suchetha, the petitioner herein, is liable to be set aside and is accordingly set aside and the case is remitted back to the second respondent to pass a fresh order in accordance

2/5

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

W.P.(MD) No.19930 of 2026

with law, as expeditiously as possible, after issuing notice to the aggrieved party, who has presented a protest letter dated 23.05.2026 with the second respondent.

5.It is for the person, who claims ownership, to produce necessary documents to substantiate that the power that was earlier granted to the petitioner was cancelled. In case, the person is unable to produce any document in respect of cancellation of power deed granted in favour of the petitioner, the respondents are directed to proceed with the case further in accordance with law.

6.The Writ Petition stands allowed, accordingly. No costs.

Index : Yes / No 15.07.2026 Internet : Yes / No mm

To

1.The District Registrar O/o.District Registrar Tirunelveli District.

3/5

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

W.P.(MD) No.19930 of 2026

2.The Sub-Registrar O/o.Sub Registrar North Veeranallur Taluk Tirunelveli District.

4/5

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

W.P.(MD) No.19930 of 2026

C.SARAVANAN, J.

mm

W.P.(MD) No.19930 of 2026

15.07.2026

5/5

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