Material misrepresentation and suppression of facts in legal proceedings render orders fraudulent and invalid, confirming that all contested claims must be disclosed.

ORDER

The Review Application has been filed to review the order of this Court directing the Sub Registrar to register the document while setting aside the refusal slip issued by the Sub Registrar.

2. The writ petition in W.P.(MD) No.22102 of 2024 has been filed as if the property in question belongs to the grandmother of the first respondent, Palaniammal, in view of the settlement deed executed in the year 1960 by her husband-Arumugam Servai. After the death of his grandmother and grandfather, the writ petitioner's mother, namely, Sethuramayi, inherited the property and later on 15.11.2023, she executed a Will in favour of the writ petitioner. The cases were tried based on the Will said to have been executed by his mother in the year 2023. His further case is that when he presented the document for registration of sale deed, the same has been refused to be registered, which was challenged.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner mainly would contend that the order has been obtained suppressing various facts. Though the settlement was executed in the year 1960, which has not been acted upon, and the original settlor himself later partitioned the property on 28.02.1995 among the daughters born through his second wife and certain extent of the property was also sold in the year 1997. Thereafter, he has also cancelled the settlement deed on 20.11.2000. In the meanwhile, in the year 2007 itself, the so called settlee, Palaniammal has already died. Thereafter, one Sethuramayi claiming to be the daughter of Arumugam Servai through the first wife Palaniammal filed a suit in O.S.No.150 of 2010 seeking declaration of title before the Sub Court, Theni. In the said suit, an amendment application in I.A.No.354 of 2012 has been filed to change the character of the property as ancestral property, and the same was allowed. The said order was reversed by the order of this Court in CRP MD.No.1961 of 2013 dated 19.08.2014, which was filed by the review petitioners herein and against which, Sethuramayi has filed SLP (C) No.36520 of 2014 and the same was also dismissed on

01.07.2016. Subsequently, an application in I.A.No.10 of 2017 has been taken out by Sethuramayi to withdraw the suit O.S.No.150 of 2010 with liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of auction. The said application was also dismissed by the Trial Court on 15.03.2017. Thereafter, the suit came to be dismissed for default on 06.04.2017. In the meanwhile. Sethuramayi has filed a writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.16572 of 2017 to quash the unilateral cancellation of settlement deed dated 20.11.2000. In the said writ petition, he has impleaded her own sons,namely, Periya Muniyandi and Chinna Muniyandi as contesting respondents instead of the real contestants and got an order as if only her sons are contesting parties.

4. According to the learned counsel, impleading her own sons and leaving the main contestant itself is a fraud on the Court. Thereafter, one of sons of Sethuramayi has filed a suit in O.S.No.35 of 2018 for permanent injunction before the District Munsif Court, Bodinayakanoor, in which, the review petitioners herein filed an application in I.A.No.437 of 2018 to reject the plaint and the same was allowed and the plaint was rejected vide order dated 08.02.2021. The said order was also confirmed by the Sub Court, Theni in CMA.No.1 of 2020. Thereafter, in the year 2024, Sethuramayi's another son Easwaram