Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 15029
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J
N.Sundaram – Appellant
Versus
The District Registrar, District Collectorate Campus, Sivagangai – 630 562. – Respondent
Writ Petition|Article 226|O.S.No.201/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.B.Mahendrarajan
For the Respondents: Mr.K.S.Selvaganesan, Additional Government Pleader, Mr.C.Senthil Murugan
The court affirmed the duty of the registrar to consider registered objections before proceeding with document registration related to ongoing litigation.
Headnote:Statute Analysis: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Facts of the Case: The petitioner seeks to prevent the registration of documents related to suit property pending adjudication in O.S.No.201/2025 by filing an objection petition on 09.02.2026.
Findings of Court:
The petitioner's representation is to be considered as per law.
Issues: The court addresses whether the objection petition should be considered before document registration.
Ratio Decidendi: The court states, 'If the objection petition of the petitioner is in a proper manner, the same would be considered by the respondents ... in accordance with law.'
Result: The court directed the respondents to consider the objection and issue notice to the petitioner regarding future registrations.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition initiates to prevent property document registration. (Para 1 , 4) |
| 2. court recognizes the right to consider objections. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. argument presented for law adherence in objection consideration. (Para 5) |
| 4. court directs procedural compliance in future registrations. (Para 6) |
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking to direct the second respondent not to register any document with regard to suit property in O.S.No.201/2025 pending before the Principal District Judge, Ramanathapuram by considering petitioner's objection petition dated 09.02.2026.
2.By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
3.Since no adverse orders are passed against the third respondent, notice to the third respondent is dispensed with.
4.The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has already filed an objection petition before the official respondents on 09.02.2026, seeking not to register any document with regard to the suit property in O.S.No.201 of 2025. Since the said representation is pending consideration, the petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition.
5.Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 & 2 would submit that if the objection petition of the petitioner is in a proper manner, the same would be considered by the respondents 1 & 2 in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
6.Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, by directing the respondents 1 & 2 to consider the petitioner's objection petition dated 09.02.2026 and if any document is presented for registration in future with respect to the subject properties, then the respondents 1 & 2 are directed to issue notice to the petitioner, hear him and thereafter take a decision in accordance with law.
There shall be no order as to costs.
