##PAGE1##

W.P.No.978 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

W.P.No.978 of 2026

Nishanthini .. Petitioner

vs

The Sub Registrar,

Pudhuchatram,

Namakkal District. .. Respondent

Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India

praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call

for the impugned refusal check slip under Refusal

No.RFL/PUDHUCHATRAM_NAMAKKAL/BOOK2/1 dated 05.01.2026

and to quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the

respondent to entertain the sale deed.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Karthikeyan

for Mr.K.Manikandan

For Respondent : Mr.U.Baranidharan,

Special Government Pleader

ORDER

The petitioner executed and presented a sale deed for

registration. The request for registration was declined under the

impugned order by invoking Section 22A(2) of the Registration Act,

1908.

1/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/01/2026 12:28:24 pm )

W.P.No.978 of 2026

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the original

intention was to form a lay out after obtaining approval. In relation

thereto, he submits that a gift deed was executed in favour of the

village panchayat for formation of a pathway. Since the DTCP

approval was not obtained, he submits that the land remains as an

agricultural land. He refers to the photographs enclosed with the

sale deed as evidence that the land remains as an agricultural land.

Therefore, he contends that the case does not fall within the scope

of Section 22A(2) of the Registration Act, 1908.

3. Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader,

accepts notice for the sole respondent. By relying on written

instructions and the encumbrance certificate pertaining to Survey

No.212/3, he submits that plots have been sold including Plot

Nos.23 and 24. Therefore, he contends that there is sufficient basis

to conclude that the petitioner is endeavouring to register the sale

of a house site in an unapproved layout.

4. The impugned order sets out reasons for concluding that

the sale is in respect of a house site in an unapproved lay out,

including by drawing reference to sale of Plot Nos.23 and 24. In

those circumstances, a factual enquiry would be warranted in order

to ascertain whether the proposed sale is in respect of a house site

2/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/01/2026 12:28:24 pm )

W.P.No.978 of 2026

in an unapproved layout. Learned counsel for the petitioner also

relied on the patta to emphasise that it is an agricultural land. All

these aspects can be conveniently considered in course of appellate

proceedings. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the

merits, this writ petition is disposed of by leaving it open to the

petitioner to file an appeal under Section 72 of the Registration Act

1908. If such appeal is presented within thirty days from the date of

receipt of a copy of this order, such appeal shall be received and

disposed of on merits. There shall be no order as to costs.

29.01.2026

Index:Yes/No

mmi

To

The Sub Registrar,

Pudhuchatram,

Namakkal District.

3/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/01/2026 12:28:24 pm )

W.P.No.978 of 2026

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J.

mmi

W.P.No.978 of 2026

29.01.2026

4/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/01/2026 12:28:24 pm )