IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24-03-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH WP No. 8968 of 2025 H.Padma Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The Sub Registrar Sub Registrar Office, Kundrathur, Chennai-600 128.

2.State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Tambaram, Chennai Respondent(s)

PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, call for the record relating to the order made in Refusal check slip vide Refusal No.RFL/Kundrathur/51/2024 dated 20.11.2024 passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to register the settlement deed in respect of the property comprised in Old Survey No.26/1 and 263, patta No.1582, New Survey No.26/41, Plot No.5, to an extent of 841 sq.ft at Mananjeri village, Kundrathur (T.K), Kanchipuram District.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.C.Vinoth Kumar For Respondent(s): Mr.U.Baranidharan Special Government Pleader for R1 Mr.V.J.Priyadarsana Government Advocate for R2

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned refusal Check Slip dated 20.11.2024 issued by the 1st respondent and for a consequential direction to the 1st respondent to register the Settlement Deed executed by the petitioner in favour of her son with respect to the subject property.

2.Heard Mr.V.C.Vinoth Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the 1st respondent and Mr.V.J.Priyadarsana, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing on behalf of the 2nd respondent.

3.The refusal Check Slip has been issued by the 1st respondent mainly based on the communication that was received from the 2nd respondent to the effect that an investigation is pending in Crime No.37 of 2023 and the present property is involved in the same.

4.In the considered view of this Court, the issue involved in the present case is squarely covered by the earlier judgement of this Court in R.Madhupriya and Another vs. The Ispector General of Registration and Another reported in 2020 SCC Online Mad 20112. The relevant portions are extracted hereunder:

5. The issue that has been raised in the present writ petition was already considered by this Court in W.P.No.1680 of 2020 by an order dated 03.08.2020. The relevant portions in the order is extracted hereunder.

“5.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a bonafide purchaser who had nothing to do with the alleged crime, which is a subject matter of investigation in Crime No.2 of

2018. It was further submitted that a mere letter issued by the Police, cannot be a ground to refuse registration unless there is an order of the Court or someorder of attachment is passed by the Competent Authority under the relevant Enactment.

06....

7.Mr.Annai Ezhil, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the fourth respondent submitted that there is a criminal case that is pending investigation against M/s. Royal Agro Dairy Limited and the persons who were in-charge in running this Company, have cheated a large number of depositors running to several crores of rupees. It was further submitted that the police was able to identify certain properties which have been attached and which are going to be used for the purpose of settling the dues to the innocent depositors.The learned counsel therefore submitted that till the investigation is completed, with regard to the property which is the subject matter in this writ petition, the third respondent should not register any property standing in the name of M/s.Royal Agro Dairy Limited.

8.Mr.T.M.Pappiah, learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents 2 and 3 submitted that in view of the letter submitted by the Investigation Officer, Encumbrance Certificate and now he cannot go against the said entry and entertain any document that pertains to M/s. Royal Agro Dairy