Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 37653
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.Suresh Kumar, N.Senthilkumar, JJ
Soornam – Appellant
Versus
V.S.Haree Rajan – Respondent
C.M.P.No.9702 of 2026 in W.A.SR.No.63507 of 2026|W.P.No.18098 of 2023
For Appellant(s): Ms.M.Monisha for M/s.Vennila Law Firm
For Respondent(s): Ms.K.Aswini Devi Special Government Pleader for R2 to R4
Court auction sale certificates must be registered; property rights disputes resolved in civil court.
Headnote:The writ court directed registration of a court-issued sale certificate in a writ petition, setting aside the registering authority's refusal. A third party claiming bona fide purchase seeks leave to appeal this order. The court held that rights over the property must be determined by a competent civil court, where the third party has already filed a suit. Issues framed include whether leave should be granted to challenge the writ court's justifiable direction for registration. The ratio decidendi is that mandatory registration of court auction sale certificates cannot be refused, but property rights disputes belong to civil courts. The petition is dismissed, and the writ appeal SR is rejected at the SR stage.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. third party seeks leave to appeal writ court order directing sale certificate registration. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. registering authorities must register court-issued auction sale certificates. (Para 3) |
| 3. property rights disputes resolved by civil courts, not writ jurisdiction. (Para 4) |
| 4. writ court order justifiable; leave denied, petition dismissed. (Para 5) |
For Appellant(s): Ms.M.Monisha for M/s.Vennila Law Firm For Respondent(s): Ms.K.Aswini Devi Special Government Pleader for R2 to R4 ORDER (Order of the Court was made by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.)
This petition has been filed by a third party, seeking leave of this Court to challenge the order passed by the Writ Court dated 13.12.2024 made in W.P.No.18098 of 2023.
2. By the said order, the learned Writ Court had directed the Registering Authority, that is respondent 3 therein, to register the sale certificate issued by the Court in favour of the writ petitioner.
3. If at all the sale certificate had been issued by the Court pursuant to the Court auction, the same has to be registered by the Registering Authority, which cannot be refused. Therefore, the refusal order passed dated 13.04.2023, which was impugned before the Writ Court, having been set aside, such a direction was issued by the Writ Court, of course, rightly.
4. The present petitioner, though claims that she is the bonafide purchaser, whether the petitioner is the purchaser or not; whether the petitioner purchased the property; whether the petitioner has got any right over the property, could very well be decided only by the competent Civil Court and the petitioner's counsel submits that, already, the present petitioner has approached the competent Civil Court and filed a suit in this regard. When that being the position, it is open to the petitioner to pursue the said suit proceedings and get a relief on merits, based on which, the petitioner could work out her remedy.
5. As far as the direction issued dated 13.12.2024 by the Writ Court, which is impugned in the proposed writ appeal, for which leave is sought herein, is concerned, it is a justifiable order and therefore, on merits also, nothing survives in the present petition to consider the same for grant of leave, as sought.
6. In that view of the matter, this petition is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, W.A.Sr.No.63507 of 2026 is rejected at the SR stage itself.
