IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 26.11.2025 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY and WMP.No.50670 of 2025

1. Mr.K.L.Dhanoji Rao

2.Mrs.Lakshmi Bai

3.Mr.K.Nagendra Rao

4.Mrs.G.Vani

5.Mrs.Maheswaribai

6.Mrs.K.L.Manjunath Rao

7.Mrs.R.Vijaya

8.Ms.R.Chethana

9.Mr.R.Vinay

10.Mrs.R.Roopabai

11.Mr.S.Sathyaprasad

12.Mrs.S.Tanuja 13.Mrs.K.Prabha .. Petitioners Vs.

1. Inspector General Of Registration

100, Santhome High Road, Chennai- 600 028.

2.The Joint I Sub Registrar Office Of Sub- Registrar Krishnagiri. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus Calling for the records of the 2nd Respondent herein vide RFL / Krishnagiri Joint I /74/ 2025 dated 14.10.2025 quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to register the sale deed dated 06.10.2025 executed by the petitioners 1 to 12 in favour of the 13th petitioner.

For Petitioners : Mrs.A.L.Gandhimathi Senior Counsel for Mr.C.T.Murugappan For Respondents : Mr.U.Baranidharan Special Government Pleader ***

ORDER

Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent of both sides, the Writ Petition itself is taken up final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

2. This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order of the 2nd Respondent dated 14.10.2025 quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to register the Sale Deed dated 06.10.2025 executed by the petitioners 1 to 12 in favour of the 13th petitioner.

3. The facts giving rise to the writ petition, in a nutshell are as follows:

(i) The petitioners 1 to 12 are the absolute owners of the subject properties. They executed a Sale Deed for the aforementioned subject properties on 06.10.2025 in favour of the 13^th petitioner. When the same was presented before the 2^nd respondent for registration on 14.10.2025, the said Authority refused to register the same vide impugned Refusal Check Slip dated 14.10.2025.

(ii) In the said Refusal Check Slip, it is stated that Narasingha Rao, Krishnaji Rao, Srinivasa Rao, Subramania Rao, Rama Rao, Erendra Rao had already sold the subject properties to Kalaiselvi and Rajaammal, who inturn sold the same to one Joseph and Karthikeyan and suit with respect to S.No.8/1, which is the part of the survey properties has been filed in O.S.No.88 of 2017 and the same is pending, therefore the petitioners can agitate their rights over the subject properties before the Civil Court. Hence, this petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that without conducting any enquiry, the 2^nd respondent refused to register the Sale Deed executed by the petitioners. Further he would submit that the petitioners are not the parties to the aforesaid suit. He therefore prays to set aside the Impugned Refusal Check Slip.

5.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would fairly concede that no enquiry was conducted before issuing Refusal Check Slip.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents and also perused the materials available on record.

7. In the present case, since the Refusal Check Slip dated 14.10.2025 came to be issued without conducting enquiry, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned Refusal Check Slip issued by the 2^nd Respondent dated

14.10.2025. Accordingly, the Refusal Check Slip issued by the 2^nd Respondent is set aside. The Respondent are directed to conduct enquiry, after issuing due notice to the parties concerned and thereafter take decision with regard to the registration of the Sale Deed. It is made clear that the pendency of the suit in O.S.No.88/2017 is not bar for the respondent concerned to register the Sale Deed, unless if there is an interim order to that effect.

8. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. WMP.No.50670 of 2025 filed to permit the petitioners to join toget