BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Date : 20/01/2026 CORAM The Hon`ble Mr.Justice KRISHNAN RAMASAMY Rukmani N ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome High Road, Pattinapakkam, Chennai - 600 028..

2. The District Registrar, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi..

3. The Sub-Registrar, Ottapidaram Sub-Registrar Office, Ottapidaram, Thoothukudi District..

4. Radharani, W/o. Late Ramasamy, 7/27, Melamudiman North Street, Keelamudiman, Ottapidaram Taluk, Thoothukudi District.. ... Respondents PRAYER :-Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider and pass appropriate orders on the petitioners representation dated 24.11.2025 requesting them not to entertain or register any document relating to the property measuring 7 Acres 66 Cents in RS No.12/2, Patta No.981, P. Duraisamipuram Village, Ottapidaram Taluk, Thoothukudi District, in view of the pending civil dispute in OS No.184/2024, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Muthumalairaja For Respondent : Mr.A.Kannan Addl. Government Pleader

ORDER

The writ petition has been filed for a mandamus to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to consider and pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's representation dated 24.11.2025 requesting them not to entertain or register any document relating to the property measuring 7 Acres 66 Cents in RS No.12/2, Patta No.981, P. Duraisamipuram Village, Ottapidaram Taluk, Thoothukudi District, in view of the pending civil dispute in OS No.184/2024, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Pleader for the official respondents. By consent of both sides, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. Since no adverse orders are going to be passed against the private respondent, notice is dispensed with.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has preferred a representation to the respondents 1 to 3 not to entertain any document with respect to the aforesaid property for registration in view of the pendency of the suit in OS No.184/2024. However, the said representation has not been considered so far and hence, prays for appropriate direction.

4. The learned Additional Government Pleader, on the other hand and on instructions from the respondents, would submit that no document is presented for registration and if any document is presented, after giving due notice to the parties concerned, necessary action would be taken. However, he would submit that unless there is a stay in the pending suit, the document cannot be refused to be registered merely based on the representation made by the petitioner.

5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the submissions made on either side, the apprehension of the petitioner appears to be that the third parties are making an attempt to register the property in dispute when a civil suit is pending. However, it is rightly contended by the respondents that when there is no stay in operation, the document cannot be refused to be registered. When there is no stay operating as on today, as rightly contended by the respondents 1 to 3, the respondents cannot refuse to register the documents. Hence, the third respondent is directed to issue notice to the petitioner and other interested parties and thereafter take a decision in the matter of registration in accordance with law and considering the pendency of the suit as well.

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

20.01.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No RR To

1. The Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome High Road, Pattinapakkam, Chennai - 600 028..

2. The District Registrar, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi..

3. The Sub-Registrar, Ottapidaram Sub-Regis