S.Subramanian Vs The District Registrar

1. The District Registrar, O/o. the District Registrar, Tirunelveli District. 2. The Sub-Registrar,, O/o the Sub-Registrar, Melapalayam, Tirunelveli City. 3. Mr.S.M. Shiek Mohideen ... Respondents

¶10

PRAYER :-

¶11

Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.2 to register and release the sale deed to the petitioner which was presented on 21.08.2025 in Document No-88/2025 for the land in Survey No. 28/2 to an extent of 1 Acre and 95 Cents situated at Itteri Village,

¶12

1/6

¶13

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

¶14

WP(MD). No.26454 of 2025

¶15

Palayamkottai Taluk, Tirunelveli District before the Respondent No.2 by considering the available Mother documents and Patta from the year 1995 within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.I.Pinaygash,

¶17

For Respondent : Mr.K.S.Selvaganesh, Addl. Govt. Pleader for R1 & R2 Mr.R.Ponkarthikeyan for R3

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondent No.2 to register and release the sale deed to the petitioner which was presented on 21.08.2025 in Document No-88/2025 for the land in Survey No. 28/2 to an extent of 1 Acre and 95 Cents situated at Itteri Village, Palayamkottai Taluk, Tirunelveli District before the Respondent No.2 by considering the available Mother documents and Patta from the year 1995 within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶20

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would

¶21

submit that when the petitioner presented a sale deed for registration, the

¶22

2/6

¶23

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

¶24

WP(MD). No.26454 of 2025

¶25

2^nd respondent refused to register the same and orally informed that out of 1 acre 95 cents, the third respondent sold 11 cents of land through a general power of attorney and therefore, kept the petitioner's document as

¶26

pending. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.

¶27

3. According to the petitioner, a forged power of attorney

¶28

was created and through which, the third respondent has sold the subject property. Hence, he prays for appropriate orders.

¶29

4. The learned counsel appearing for the third respondents

¶30

raised objections to the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶31

5. This Court heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶32

6. On a perusal of the records, it is seen that the third respondent sold the property in the year 2025 through a Power of

¶33

3/6

¶34

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

¶35

WP(MD). No.26454 of 2025

¶36

Attorney dated 29.06.2019. However, the principal had passed away on 17.12.2007. Once the principal had passed away, the Power of Attorney came to an end, and therefore, the third respondent, only a Power of Attorney holder, could not have executed the sale deed. Thus, it prima facie appears that the Power of Attorney document was forged. Hence, merely citing the registration of the sale deed executed by the third respondent, the second respondent cannot refuse to register the petitioner’s sale deed.

¶37

7. In view of the above, this Court directs the petitioner to

¶38

re-present the sale deed dated 21.08.2025, and the second respondent is directed to receive the same. Thereafter, the second respondent shall issue notice to the third respondent and conduct an enquiry, particularly with regard to the Power of Attorney dated 29.06.2019 as well as the death of the principal, and take a decision on the registration of the sale deed presented by the petitioner, in accordance with law, if it is otherwise in order. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶39

4/6

¶40

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

¶41

WP(MD). No.26454 of 2025

¶42

8. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶43

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶44

12.02.2026