IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

W.P No. 41684 of 2025

Dharmalingam

Petitioner

Vs

1. The Inspector General Of Registration,

Santhome High Road,

Pattinapakkam, Chennai 600 028.

2. The Deputy Inspector General of

Registration, Salem.

3. The District Registrar (Administration),

Salem South. 4. Selvamani

D/o.Vairappan,

The Sub Registrar, Magudamchavadi,

Sankari Taluk, Salem District.

5. R.Pachamuthu

6.R.Ashok Kumar

Respondents

Prayer:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to initiate appropriate proceedings as provided under Sections 82 and 83 of the Registration Act (Act 16 of 1908) against respondents 5 and 6, and consequent disciplinary action against the 4^th respondent in accordance with law, by considering the petitioner representation dated 29.07.2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Sathish Kumar For Respondents : Mr.Abhishek Murthy Government Advocate

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to initiate appropriate proceedings as provided under Sections 82 and 83 of the Registration Act (Act 16 of 1908) against respondents 5 and 6, and consequent disciplinary action against the 4^th respondent in accordance with law, by considering the petitioner representation dated 29.07.2025.

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

(i) The Petitioner is a senior citizen aged 79 years. He acquired title over a portion of land in S.F.No.259/2 (sub-divided as 259/2A1CI) at Ernapuram Village, Sankagiri Taluk, through a compromise decree in O.S.No.119 of 2020 and subsequent Court executed Sale Deed dated 11.12.2024, duly registered as Doc.No.93/2025. The revenue records and encumbrance certificate also reflect his title. Thereafter, the petitioner entered into Sale Agreement with one Ramesh and the same was registered on the file of the 4^th Respondent on 20.01.2025 vide Doc.No.318/2025.

(ii) While so, the 4^th respondent/ Sub-Registrar, without proper verification, illegally registered Doc.No.4095/2025 on 04.06.2025 in favour of the 5^th respondent based on a conveyance executed by 6^th respondent, which included the petitioner’s property, which was already covered by Sale Deed dated 11.12.2024. When questioned about the same, the 4^th respondent/Sub Registrar instead of rectifying her fraudulent act, lodged a false complaint against the petitioner in F.I.R.No.237/2025 alleging that on 23.06.2025, the petitioner along with others defamed her. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 29.07.2025 to the respondents highlighting the fraudulent registration. The 2^nd respondent vide communication dated 29.08.2025 has forwarded the same to the 3^rd respondent for necessary action. Since, no action has been taken on the same, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking for the aforesaid relief.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner being a senior citizen is solely dependent on the income of the subject property. Due to fraudulent registration, petitioner is facing severe financial hardship. He therefore prays to allow this Writ Petition.

4. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the Respondents 1 to 3 would submit that according to the petitioner, the respondents 5 and 6 have committed the offence of fraud on the petitioner. In the event, if the fraud said to have been committed by the 5^th respondent was brought to the knowledge of the 4^th respondent, during the course of registration, the 4^th respondent/Sub Registrar himself would have certainly not registered the sale deed, and might have taken steps for initiation of criminal prosecution against the respondents 5 and 6 as per Sections 82 and 83 of the Act., but, according to the petitioner, the 4^th respondent, the Sub Registrar has also colluded with the respondents 5 and 6 and registered the fraudulent Sale Dee