SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 16459

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J
M.S.Rajasekaran – Appellant
Versus
The District Registrar – Respondent
Writ Petition



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms.S.Nirmal Aditya
For the Respondents: Mr.U.Baranidharan, Special Government Pleader

Court determines that registration officers lack power to invalidate registered documents unless declared fraudulent by civil court.

Headnote:The court analyzed the powers of registration officers in relation to fraudulent registrations as per Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner claimed multiple fraudulent transactions between 2012 and 2020 and sought an inquiry based on a circular from 2018. The court found the registration department's inquiry scope limited and indicated that only a civil court can declare documents as fraudulent. The petitioner was advised to approach a civil court instead. The writ petition was disposed of without costs.

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.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top