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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 65244

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J
R.RAJAM SHEELA – Appellant
Versus
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION – Respondent
WP No.43353 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.V.Ashokkumar
For the Respondents:Mr.P.Harish Government Advocate for R1 & R2

Court directed an enquiry into the registration of a disputed sale deed, emphasizing the need for compliance with statutory requirements.

Headnote:The petitioner filed a writ of mandamus under Article 226 seeking direction to the second respondent for registering the sale deed dated 24.10.2025. The second respondent refused registration citing objections by third parties. The Court directed the second respondent to conduct an enquiry regarding the registration of the sale deed. The outcome depends on if the document complies with registration requirements. The petitioner is to be informed of the result of the enquiry, and appropriate orders to be provided if registration is denied.

Table of Content
1. petition for registration of sale deed. (Para 1 , 3)
2. government advocate's response to objections. (Para 2 , 4)
3. court's directive for enquiry. (Para 5)

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to direct the 2nd respondent to proceed/complete the registration of the deed of sale dated

24.10.2025 presented vide Token No.TP/ 237151157/2025.

2.Mr.P.Harish, learned Government Advocate, takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 & 2. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

3.Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner executed a sale deed dated 24.10.2025 and presented for registration vide Token No.TP/ 237151157/2025 before the 2nd respondent. However, the 2nd respondent refused to registered the said sale deed citing the reason that some third parties have raised objections to register the document in respect of the subject property.

4.Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 & 2 would submit that since the third parties have raised objection for registering the sale deed dated 24.10.2025, after conducting enquiry, the sale deed dated

24.10.2025 will be registered, if it is otherwise in order.

5.Considering the submissions made by either parties and in view of the limited prayer sought for in this Writ Petition, without going into the merits of the case, this Court directs the 2nd respondent to conduct enquiry with regard to the registration of the sale deed dated 24.10.2025, presented by the petitioner after issuing due notice to all the parties concerned and register the same if it is otherwise in order and if the 2nd respondent decided not to register the document, appropriate orders shall be passed, forthwith.

6.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top