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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of on terms: (i) on any further presentation of a document by the petitioner or Salamon Jeyaraj, the Sub-Registrar to conduct an enquiry to ascertain the veracity of the claims of both sides and pass orders only after considering the objections of the other side; (ii) liberty to the petitioner to seek review of the order in W.P(MD)No.95 of 2026 in the same writ petition if it is based on a forged document/false representation, it not being agitable in the connected proceedings; (iii) rights of the parties to approach the civil court kept open; (iv) no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing the second respondent not to accept the objection petition annexed with the allegedly fabricated sale agreement submitted by the third respondent, and to allow the petitioner to register documents in respect of his properties. +2 more

Court's answer

If any document is further presented by the petitioner or the said Salamon Jeyaraj, an enquiry shall be conducted by the Sub-Registrar to ascertain the veracity of the claims of both, and orders shall be passed only after considering the objections of the other side.

Ratio / Principle

If the petitioner's case is that the earlier order in W.P(MD)No.95 of 2026 is based on a forged document and false representation, his remedy is to file a review in the same writ petition; that order cannot be agitated in the connected proceedings.

Key takeaways

The rights of the parties to approach the civil Court are kept open.ratio¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench (D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.) disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 filed by Marimuthu seeking a mandamus to the Sub-Registrar, Alangulam, not to accept an objection petition of the third respondent, Salamon Jeyaraj, allegedly supported by a fabricated sale agreement, and to permit registration of deeds over properties in joint patta nos. 1635, 2835 and 2806, Alangulam Village, Alangulam Taluk, Tenkasi District. The Court recorded that Salamon Jeyaraj had earlier obtained an admission-stage order in W.P(MD)No.95 of 2026 requiring that notice be issued to him whenever any document is presented for registration and that the Sub-Registrar consider the matter after enquiry. Disposing of the petition, the Court directed that (i) if any document is further presented by either party, the Sub-Registrar shall conduct an enquiry into the veracity of the claims of both and pass orders only after considering the objections of the other side; (ii) if the petitioner contends that the order in W.P(MD)No.95 of 2026 is based on a forged document and false representation, his remedy is a review in that writ petition and it cannot be agitated in the connected proceedings; and (iii) the rights of the parties to approach the civil court are kept open. No costs.

W.P(MD)No.7906 of 2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Dated: 25.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

W.P(MD)No.7906 of 2026

Marimuthu

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Registrar, O/o.The District Registrar, Tenkasi.

2.The Sub-Registrar, Sub-Registrar Office, Alangulam, Tenkasi District.

3.Salamon Jeyaraj ...Respondents

Writ Petitions are filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2^nd respondent not to accept the objection petition annexed with fabricated sale agreement submitted by the 3^rd respondent in respect of petitioner's properties covered under joint patta Nos.1635, 2835, 2806 situated in Alangulam Village, Alangulam Taluk, Tenkasi District and to allow the petitioner to register any deed like sale deed, settlement deed, gift deed, mortgage or any other document of conveyance, on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 17.02.2026.

1

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

W.P(MD)No.7906 of 2026

For Petitioner :Mr.M.Sankar For R1 to R3 :M/s.K.Malathi Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition is filed for a mandamus directing the second respondent not to accept the objection petition annexed with the Fabricated Sale Agreement submitted by the 3rd respondent in respect of the petitioners' property covered under Joint Pata Nos.1635, 2835, 206, situated Alangulam Village, Alangulam Taluk, Tenkasi District and to allow the petitioner to register the documents with reference to his property by considering the representation of the petitioner.

2.After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the material records of the case, it can be seen that earlier one Salamon Jeyaraj approached this Court by way of writ petition in W.P(MD)No.95 of 2026 and at the admission stage, this Court passed an order on the claim made by the said Salamon Jeyaraj that whenever any document is purported to be registered in respect of the said property, notice to be issued to Salamon Jeyaraj and after enquiry, the Sub register has to consider the same.

3.Now the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that

the Salamon Jeyaraj approached this Court by relying upon the fabricated

2

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

W.P(MD)No.7906 of 2026

and false sale agreement. The same is not executed by the petitioner at all. Therefore, now the petitioner has made a representation to the Sub-Register

not to accept the objection of the said Salamon Jeyaraj and now wants to take action with reference to the same.

4.In view thereof, this writ petition is disposed of on the following

terms:

(i)if any document is further presented by the petitioner or the said Salamon Jebaraj, an enquiry be conducted by the Sub-Registrar in order to ascertain the veracity of the claims of the petitioner as well as the said Salamon Jeyaraj and pass orders in respect thereof only after considering the objections of the other side.

(ii)If the petitioner submits the earlier order passed in W.P(MD)No.95 of 2026 itself is based on forged document and false representation, it will be open for the petitioner to file a review in the same writ petition and the said order cannot be agitated in the connected proceedings.

(iii)The rights of parties to approach the civil Court is also kept open. (iv)No costs.

25.03.2026

NCC:Yes/No Ns

3

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

W.P(MD)No.7906 of 2026

To

1.The District Registrar, O/o.The District Registrar, Tenkasi.

2.The Sub-Registrar, Sub-Registrar Office, Alangulam, Tenkasi District.

4

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

W.P(MD)No.7906 of 2026

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

Ns

W.P(MD)No.7906 of 2026

25.03.2026

5

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