The central legal point established is that the pendency of a suit alone cannot be a valid ground for refusing the registration of a document related to the subject property, without an interim order restraining alienation.

JUDGMENT :

M. DHANDAPANI, J.

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ, order or direction in the nature of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the Refusal Check Slip in refusal number RFL/Muthupettai/12/2022 dated 22.04.2022 issued by the respondent and to quash the same as illegal, incompetent and ultra-vires and consequently direct the respondent to register the sale deed dated 20.04.2022 executed by the petitioner.

1. The present petition has been filed seeking the relief of quashment of the impugned Refusal Check Slip in refusal number RFL/Muthupettai/12/2022 dated 22.04.2022 issued by the respondent and a direction to the Respondent to register the sale-deed dated 20.04.2022 executed by the petitioner, within a stipulated period.

2. Mr. Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for Respondent. With the consent of learned counsel appearing on either side, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the absolute owner of the agricultural lands measuring to an extent of Acres 5.04 Cents, comprised in S. No. 224-5, S. No. 225-1A, S. No. 225-1B and S. No. 225-2 in Buthagaram Village, Mannarkudi Taluk, Thiruvarur District. Thereafter, through a sale-deed dated 20.04.2022, the petitioner sold the aforesaid properties to one Meikanda Devan. When the sale-deed was presented before the respondent for registration, the respondent refused to register the same vide the impugned Refusal Check Slip dated 22.04.2022, on the ground that there is a civil suit in O.S. No. 33 of 2022 is pending against the petitioner on the file of the Subordinate Court, Mannarkudi, which has been filed by one G. Baskar for specific performance to enforce the sale agreement dated 01.04.2022. Challenging the impugned Refusal Check Slip, the petitioner has come up with this Writ petition seeking the relief of quashment of the same.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the suit which has been referred in the impugned Refusal Check Slip cannot be a bar for refusing the registration of the sale deed, however, the said suit is filed for specific performance, which was filed by one G. Baskar, who has no right or share over the subject property. Further, the property in dispute is the self acquired property of the petitioner. That being the case, mere pendency of the suit cannot be a ground for refusing the registration of the sale deed. Further, in the absence of any interim order in the suit restraining the alienation of the subject property, the Refusal Check Slips impugned in this Writ Petition is liable to be quashed and this Writ Petition may be allowed.

5. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent submits that while a suit for specific performance in respect of the subject property of the Writ Petition is pending before the competent civil court, any document pertaining to the said property cannot be entertained, therefore, the Refusal Check Slips issued by the Respondent/Sub Registrar cannot be found fault with and therefore, the order impugned in this Writ petition needs no interference of this Court and deserves to be dismissed.

6. Heard the learned counsel on the either side and perused the materials available on record.

7. The issue in this case no longer res integra as the similar issue was considered by this Court in the case of Vadamugam Vellode Nalukarai Nattu Goundergal Sangam vs. Inspector General of Registration, 2021 (1) CTC 535 in W.P. No. 12585 of 2020 and W.M.P. Nos. 15518 and 15521 of 2020. The relevant portion of the order is extracted under as:

10. The 5th Respondent has approached the Civil Court and he has file O.S. No. 48 of 2019, seeking for the relief of Partition and separate possession of 1/27th share in the Suit properties. It is also seen that the 5th Respondent has filed yet another Suit in