IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 25-06-2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

W.P.No.15401 of 2018

And

W.M.P.No.18290 of 2018

M/s.Abdul Khader

Partnership Firm,

Represented by its Partner Hitesh Kumar,

No.7, Sulaiman Zakaria Avenue,

Egmore,

Chennai-600 008.

..

Petitioner

Versus

1.Inspector General of Registration.

Santhome High Road,

Santhome,

Chennai.

2.The District Registrar,

Central Madras,

No.268, Bharathi Salai,

Express Estate,

Royapettah,

Chennai-600 014.

3.The Sub Registrar (Triplicane),

No.268, Bharathi Salai,

Express Estate,

Royapettah,

Chennai-600 014.

..

Respondents

PRAYER:

Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of

Mandamus, directing the third respondent to register the

Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds, the Temporary Document

bearing No.TP/16095147/2018 pending with the third respondent.

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

For Petitioner

: Mr.K.Rajasekaran

For Respondents : Mr.T.M.Pappiah,

Special Government Pleader.

ORDER

The relief sought for in this writ petition is for a

direction to direct the third respondent to register the

Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds, the Temporary Document

bearing No.TP/16095147/2018 pending with the third respondent.

2. The writ pettiioner claims that he is the owner of the

property of 686.75/46482 undivided share out of total land of 9

grounds and 106 sq. ft., comprised in old Survey No.26;

R.S.No.323/3, Block No.11 of Triplicane Division together with

Shop No.4, built up area of 2500 sq. ft., in ground and

mezzanine floor in a building known as 'Aarthi Chamber',

D.No.189, Mount Road, Chennai-600 002, in addition to

411.51/46428^th undivided share out of total extent of land

measuring 9 grounds and 106 sq. ft., comprised in old Survey

No.26; R.S.No.323/3, Block No.11 of Triplicane Division together

with shop No.17, constructed thereon measuring an extent of 1000

sq. ft.

3. The writ petitioner had purchased the said property in an

open public auction held under Section 69-A of the Transfer of

Property Act conducted by the auctioneers and the writ

petitioner was the successful bidder and the Sale Deed was

executed and registered as Document No.1346/2017 by the

mortgagee, namely Mrs.Madhuri Gulecha, dated 11.10.2017. The

said property was mortgaged to Mrs.Madhuri Gulecha by Mrs.Meeta

Lalchand and the said Mortgage Deed was registered as Document

No.3/2011 dated 3.1.2011. This agreement provided for sale

without Court intervention under Section 69-A of the Transfer of

Property Act.

4. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that the third

respondent is refusing to register the Memorandum of Deposit of

Title Deeds drawn by the writ petitioner, who is the absolute

owner of the property by virtue of the Sale Deed dated

11.10.2017 registered as Document No.1346/2017. The reason

stated by the third respondent was that there was an attachment

pending before the Court.

5. However, the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the

writ petitioner, contended that the third respondent ought to

have followed the rules and the provisions of the Registration

Act in registering the document or refused to register the same,

which was presented by the writ petitioner before the third

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

respondent. It is further urged that the Code of Civil

Procedure, more-specifically to Order 38, Rule 10 on Court

Attachment, states that the same will not affect the rights of

persons, who are not parties to the suit and the attachment is

not a bar of the decree holder, seeking the sale of the property

under attachment. Thus, in spite of the attachment, the third

respondent-S