IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J
M.S.Rajasekaran – Appellant
Versus
The District Registrar – Respondent
Writ Petition
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner alleges fraud in real estate transactions. (Para 1 , 4) |
| 2. court discusses the powers of registration officers. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. court limits registration inquiry to civil court determinations. (Para 5) |
| 4. court dismisses writ petition, suggesting civil court approach. (Para 6) |
ORDER
The petitioner complains of multiple fraudulent transactions starting from an agreement of sale dated 30.07.2012 and culminating in sale deed dated 24.11.2020. After submitting representation dated 09.01.2026 requesting for an inquiry in relation thereto, the present writ petition has been filed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon circular dated 31.07.2018 issued by the Inspector General of Registration. He submits that the District Registrars were directed under the said circular to file police complaints against fraudsters and to make entries in the relevant indexes.
3. Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader, accepts notice for both the respondents. He submits that such entries may be made in the index only if a civil court were to declare the registered document as fraudulent. Otherwise, he submits that the registering officer does not have the power to cancel a registered document.
4. From the representation of the petitioner, it is noticeable that the petitioner is complaining about 10 allegedly fraudulent documents registered between 30.07.2012 and 24.11.2020. The representation has been submitted on
09.01.2026 and the petitioner has approached this Court in the same month.
5. The scope of inquiry of the registration department is limited to activities relating to the registration of a document, which are carried out within such registration offices. The complaint and grievance of the petitioner goes beyond that. The circular relied on by the petitioner does not support the case of the petitioner because entries relating to fraudulent documents may only be made after a jurisdictional civil court concludes that such documents are fraudulent. Such matters warrant the consideration of disputed questions of fact in a trial.
6. For reasons set out above, the request of the petitioner cannot be countenanced. By leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional civil court, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.