IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 19.11.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI

Ganesh Petitioner

Vs

1. The Inspector General Registration

Mylapore, Chennai.

2.The District Registrar

Krishnagiri,

Krishnagiri District. 3.The Sub Registrar

Shoolagiri, Krishnagiri District

4.Krishnaveni

5.Vanaja

6.Sivarani Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the petitioner representation dated 07.01.2019 to cancel the documents such as Release Deed executed by the 4^th respondent dated 07.12.2018 bearing Document No.5908/2018 in favour of 5^th and 6^th respondent and Sale

Agreement dated 10.12.2018 in favour one Ramamurthy and others registered as Document No.5951/2018 on the file of 3^rd respondent executed by the respondents 5 and 6 with regard lands in Survey Nos.55/1, 55/3, 55/4 56/2B2, 57/1D, 57/1C1, 57/1C2, 57/1A2, 57/2B, 57/2C1, 57/2A and 4/2 of Thiyagarasanapalli Village, Shoolagiri Taluk.

For petitioner : Mr.K. Thiruvengadam For respondents : Mr. R. Sasikumar Govt. Advocate for R1 to R3 Mr. V. Nicholas for R4 to R6

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 07.01.2019 to cancel the documents such as Release Deed executed by the 4^th respondent dated 07.12.2018 bearing Document No.5908/2018 in favour of 5^th and 6^th respondent and Sale Agreement dated 10.12.2018 in favour of one Ramamurthy and others registered as Document No.5951/2018 on the file of 3^rd respondent executed by the respondents 5 and 6 with regard lands in Survey Nos.55/1, 55/3, 55/4 56/2B2, 57/1D, 57/1C1, 57/1C2, 57/1A2, 57/2B, 57/2C1, 57/2A and 4/2 of Thiyagarasanapalli Village, Shoolagiri Taluk.

2. Short facts :-

The properties comprised in the survey numbers mentioned supra are ancestral properties of the petitioner’s grandfather, which subsequently devolved upon the petitioner’s father, who thereafter executed a settlement deed dated 04.09.2013 registered as document No.3418 of 2013 on the file of SRO, Shoolagiri in favour of the petitioner and his brother. Thereafter, they obtained individual patta and as such they are in possession and enjoyment of the same. When that be so, the respondents 4 to 6 without any rights intended to grab the petitioner’s properties and they have created encumbrances over the petitioner’s land in collusion with the 3^rd respondent. In turn, the 3^rd respondent had registered a Release Deed executed by the 4^th respondent dated 07.12.2018 bearing document No.5908 of 2018 in favour of the 5^th and 6^th respondents. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the 3^rd respondent without application of mind and verifying the revenue records and without any proper documents mechanically in collusion with the respondents 4 to 6 created and registered bogus documents with an intention to grab the petitioner’s properties. Under such circumstances, the petitioner has submitted a representation to the respondents 1 to 3 to cancel the above two documents executed by the respondents 4 to 6 as per the relevant provisions of Registration Act. But till date, neither any action taken nor his representation was considered. Therefore, this writ petition has been filed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner commenced his arguments by submitting that the writ petition contains two limbs of prayer, one relating to the validity of the impugned document and the other seeking consequential reliefs.

4. When, this Court posed a query as to the provision of law under which the 3^rd respondent was empowered to cancel the document in question, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that liberty may be granted to the petitioner to work out the remedy before the competent Civil Court seeking cancellation of the document executed by the 4^th respondent in favour of the 5^th and 6^th respondents, in the manner known to law and directions may be issu