Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 36079
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J
S.Nandha Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The District Registrar, District Registrar Office, Trichy, Trichy District – Respondent
W.P(MD)No.9282 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.M.Pitchai Muthu
For the Respondents:Mr.D.S.Nedunchezhian Government Advocate
Writ court cannot cancel registered deeds on fraud/undue influence claims; civil court jurisdiction required.
Headnote:The petitioner sought cancellation of a registered release deed under Article 226, claiming execution without free will due to undue influence and fraud. The court observed that writ jurisdiction cannot determine validity of documents involving such claims. Petitioner directed to approach civil court. Issues framed: whether registrars can cancel deeds on fraud claims. Ratio: Only civil courts can adjudicate title disputes and undue influence. Writ petition disposed of with liberty to file civil suit.
Act Referred
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition seeks cancellation of release deed executed without free consent. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. writ court lacks jurisdiction over fraud/undue influence claims. (Para 3) |
| 3. petition dismissed; liberty to approach civil court. (Para 4) |
ORDER
This writ petition is filed for a mandamus directing the first and second respondents to cancel the release deed dated 01.08.2012 executed by the petitioner and registered at the office of the second respondent as Document No.2804/2012, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 28.02.2022.
2.It can be seen that the persons in whose favour the release was made are arrayed as respondents 3 to 5. The claim of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as in the representation is that on improper advice, without free Will and consent, the petitioner was made to execute this said release deed. Therefore, it can be seen that the petitioner is attacking the release deed on the ground that the same was not made of free Will and there is undue influence, fraud etc.
3.If that be the case, it is for the petitioner to assail the document by approaching the competent Civil Court and neither this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India nor the Sub-Register in exercise of its power can decide about the same.
4.In view thereof, with such liberty kept open to the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court. The prayer in the writ petition cannot be countenanced and as such, the same is disposed of. No costs.
