SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 63118

MADRAS HIGH COURT
G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J
July Two Thousand Nineteen PRESENT THE HON`BLE MR JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU WP NO.19896 OF 2019 N.VALLIAMMAI [ PETITIONER ] – Appellant
Versus
1 THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF [ RESPONDENTS ] REGISTRATION NO 100, SANTHOME HIG – Respondent
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS ( Special Original Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Tenth day



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 03.02.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

W.P.No.19896 of 2019

N.Valliammai

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The Inspector General of Registration,

No.100, Santhome High Road,

Chennai – 600 028.

2.The Sub Registrar,

Virudhunagar Joint – 2,

No.58/1 Cutchery Road,

Virudhunagar – 626001.

3.The Sub Registrar,

Municipal Community Hall,

Gopalsamy Street,

Ram Nagar, Ambattur,

Chennai – 600053.

... Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus,

directing the 1st Respondent to issue orders suitably amending

the records of Respondents 2 and 3 i.e. Sub Registrar,

Virudhunagar and the Sub Registrar, Amabattur and recording that

the Settlement Deed dated 24.03.2016 bearing Document No.1982 of

2016 executed between R.Valliammai in favour of Radhammal on the

file of SRO, Virudhunagar and General Power of Attorney dated

01.04.2016 bearing Document No.2114 of 2016 executed by

Radhammal in favour of Surendiran on the file of SRO,

Virudhunagar and transmitted to the file of Sub Registrar,

Ambattur, as invalid and void.

For Petitioner : Mr.PL.Narayanan

For Respondents

: Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan

Special Government Pleader

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed to issue a Writ of

Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to issue orders suitably

amending the records of the 2nd and 3rd respondents i.e., Sub

Registrar, Virudhunagar and the Sub Registrar, Amabattur and

recording that the Settlement Deed dated 24.03.2016 bearing

Document No.1982 of 2016 executed between R.Valliammai in favour

of Radhammal on the file of SRO, Virudhunagar and General Power

of Attorney dated 01.04.2016 bearing Document No.2114 of 2016

executed by Radhammal in favour of Surendiran on the file of

SRO, Virudhunagar and transmitted to the file of Sub Registrar,

Ambattur, as invalid and void.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner

purchased the property comprised in S.Nos.476/2 and 183/1 ad-

measuring to an extent of 3600 sq.ft., situated at Oragadam

Building Society by the Sale Deed dated 12.04.1979 registered

vide Document No.1188 of 1979 on the file of the Sub Registrar

Office, Ambattur. While being so, one R.Valliammai settled the

said property as 1st item and a vacant house plot bearing No.545

to an extent of 482 sq.ft., as 2nd item of the property

registered vide Document No.1982/2016. While executing the

Settlement Deed, she was identified by the identity card viz.,

Voter ID No.PQT 2041214. However, on verification of the said

Voter ID, there is no such card issued by the authority and

concluded that it was forged one and an impersonator has been

used to execute the Settlement Deed. The Settlee viz., one

Radhammal through aforesaid settlement deed had executed General

Power of Attorney in favour of one Surendiran and he produced

his identity card viz., Voter ID No.XCX 1896240. The Settlee

viz., Radhammal produced her identity card viz., Voter ID No.RVS

4501201. On verification of the said identity card found that

the said card does not exist and as such, the said General Power

of Attorney is also fabricated. Thereafter, the said Surendiran

attempted to sell the property by way of agreement of sale in

favour of one A.Kumar and D.Rajappa and received huge sum of

money. The said settlement deed and the power of attorney are

fraudulent and void documents. The said Surendiran was arrested

and detained under the judicial custody. Therefore, the

petitioner requested the 1st respondent to issue suitable

direction to the 2nd and 3rd respondents to record those documents

as null and void.

3. On perusal of the counter a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top