JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent to cancel the sale deed in Document No.28 of 2002 dated 17.01.2002 stands in the name of Mr.Venkataraman in Old Survey No.204/1, New Survey No.137/2, to the extent of 0.59 cents, situated at Chettikuppam Village, Marakanam, Tindivanam Taluk, Villupuram District.)

1. If there is any perennial problem prevailing in the society, in order to address and redress such problem by legal means, to give a quietus, people would certainly approach the law Courts. Courts also, within the four corners of the law prevailing, would find a legal solution for any such perennial issue and ultimately, the finality would be given.

2. If such final verdict has come, certainly, there will be a permanent solution made available to the stakeholders in the society. Thereafter, most probably such kind of issues would not again knock the doors of the Court. However, in some occasions, there will be some exceptions to this general perception, where, even though law Courts made sincere efforts to give a quietus to the issue which is considered to be perennial one, even then there would not be a complete subsiding of the issue, as again and again, the same issue or problem would emerge consistently and in such situation or circumstances, people will have no other option except to be triggered to once again approach the law Courts.

3. The issue that we are going to confront in this batch of cases is one such issue, where, though many number of decisions had come from law Courts ie., from this Court as well as various High Courts and the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, there is no complete calm down of the issue, as recurringly the same problem or issue erupts or emanates. Therefore, in order to redress that grievances, constantly people are approaching this Court, of course with the same issue or problem.

4. With this background introductory, if we look at the prayers sought for in this batch of cases, it go to show that, the people’s desire to hold and enjoy the immovable property, whether it may be a land or a building or fixtures, whatever it may be, is not limited. Such desire is two fold. One set of people wants to achieve the desire or goal in lawful means, by investing their lawful fortune which they derived in their lifetime by doing hard work, but, another set of people without having any such fortune out of hard work in lawful means want to achieve such illegal desire, with the result, there have been instances of fraudulent transactions of immovable properties and that would go to the Registration Department being governed under the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908, [in short would be called as ‘1908 Act’] and there are registrations and counter registrations of instruments dealing with such immovable properties, with a result, there has been hot burning issues and the people who are otherwise the lawful owners or lawful claimants of any such immovable property, would come to the Court of law, especially before the High Courts, invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India as an instant grievance redressal mechanism. The present batch of cases are the illustrative cases which have come to this Court for redressing such kind of grievances.

5. Based on the prayer sought for in this batch of cases, it can be categorised under three broad categories:

“Category 1: Writ Petitions have been filed seeking for a prayer to cancel the registered sale deed or settlement deed in respect of immovable property registered in the concerned Registrar office. Category 2 : Writ Petitions have been filed, where, the action on the part of the Sub-Registrar concerned to refuse to register a document or instrument pertaining to immovable property are challenged.

Category 3 : Writ Petitions have been filed questionin