ORDER :

Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records on the file of 2nd respondent pertaining to the notice dated 19.01.2023 bearing No.7777/B3/2022 and quash the same as without jurisdiction.

The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records on the file of 2nd respondent pertaining to the notice dated 19.01.2023 bearing No.7777/B3/2022 and quash the same as without jurisdiction.

2. In respect of Document Nos.143/2000, 1882/2000, 1884/2000, 1795/2002, 1796/2002, 6645/2007, 6646/2007, 2325/2012, 2977/2012 registered at the SRO Tiruppur, the 3rd respondent had given a complaint to the 2nd respondent to declare those documents as fraudulent or bogus documents and as a sequel, to cancel the documents. The said complaint given against the petitioner having been entertained by the 2nd respondent within the meaning of Section 77-A of the Registration Act, the 2nd respondent had issued summons dated 19.01.2023 to the petitioner directing him to show cause and also to appear before the 2nd respondent on 13.02.2023 with supporting documents to establish that the documents in question challenged by the 3rd respondent by way of such complaint, are genuine documents.

3. Aggrieved over the said summons issued by the 2nd respondent dated 19.01.2023, the petitioner has moved the present writ petition with aforesaid prayer.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner who would submit that, insofar as the documents which are in question through a complaint made by the 3rd respondent is concerned, those documents are from the years 2000 to 2012. In respect of those documents admittedly the 3rd respondent filed a civil suit and that has been mentioned in the very complaint itself stating that to declare those documents as fraudulent documents admittedly the 3rd respondent has filed a civil suit which is pending since 2014 before the concerned court.

5. When that being so, as parallel proceedings, the 3rd respondent wanted to invoke Section 77-A of the Act and by thus, the present complaint given by the 3rd respondent ought not to have been entertained by the 2nd respondent, as the 2nd respondent does not have jurisdiction to entertain such complaint in view of the pendency of the suit on the very same issue.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would also rely upon a circular issued by the Inspector General of Registration (IGR) in Letter No.33760/U1/2022 dated 27.09.2022 under which the IGR has given certain category of cases and how those cases would fall under Section 77-A / 22-B of the Registration Act.

7. Relying upon this circular, learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that, in the said circular, what is the meaning of forged document has been given under various circumstances. None of the circumstances would apply to the documents in question against which the complaint has been given by the 3rd respondent. Therefore, even according to the circular issued by the 3rd respondent, the 2nd respondent does not have the jurisdiction to entertain the complaint given by the 3rd respondent. Therefore, the consequential summons issued by the 2nd respondent which is impugned herein would not sustain in the legal scrutiny. Hence, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks the indulgence of this Court against the impugned communication.

8. Heard Mr. Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents. In view of the order that is going to be passed in this writ petition, notice to the 3rd respondent is hereby dispensed with.

9. Learned Special Government Pleader would submit that, the power vested with the 2nd respondent District Registrar is the statutory power vested under Section 77-A of the Act and that power being a quasi judicial power the District Registrar has to entertain such complaint given by any aggrieved party against the documents which have already been regis