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) 46222

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D.Bharatha Chakravarthy, J
Anita Rose – Appellant
Versus
Sub Registrar – Respondent
Writ Petition



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: R.Russel Raj
For the Respondents: F.Deepak

Property documents cannot be refused registration under S.22-A of the Registration Act merely for lack of planning approval, provided the parties execute an affidavit undertaking that they will not change the land's usage or develop it without prior permission from the competent planning authority.

Headnote:The petitioner challenged a refusal check slip issued by the registering authority denying the registration of a sale deed under S.22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, on the premise of lack of planning authority approval for residential conversion. The Court examined the tension between the constitutional right to property and development control regulations. Directing that the matter is already settled, the Court held that registration cannot be denied solely based on location or potential usage if the parties provide a sworn undertaking not to alter the land's nature without requisite planning approvals. The Court relied on established principles that such undertakings effectively mitigate regulatory concerns while protecting property rights. The writ petition was allowed with directions, stipulating that the petitioner file notarized affidavits of undertaking with the Court, the registration office, the local body, and electricity authorities within four weeks.

Table of Content
1. registration of sale deeds cannot be refused based on potential commercial or residential usage if specific undertakings are provided. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 28.04.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Anita Rose ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Sub Registrar, Eraniel, Kanyakumari District..

2. Jeya Prabhakaran David

3. Leethial Selvi ...Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned Refusal Check Slip bearing Refusal No. RFL/Eraniel/40/2026, quash the same, and consequently direct the 1st respondent to register and release the Sale Deed dated 07.01.2026 executed by the respondents 2 and 3 in favour of the petitioner, in respect of 5 cents of land comprised in Survey Nos. 809/4A3 and 809/4A2A, situated at Vilukuri C Village (formerly VilukuriVillage), Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari District, For Petitioner : Mr.R.Russel Raj For R1 : Mr.F.Deepak Special Government Pleader ORDER This Writ Petition challenges the impugned refusal check slip. The document is refused registration under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, on the ground that the property is conveyed as a residential plot or for residential use without approval from the planning authority to convert the site into a residential one. In this case, the petitioner contends that the land is conveyed as such, without changing its use.

2. In such cases, the matter is no longer res-integra and is governed by the judgement of this Court in Sankarakumar & another vs. The Sub-Registrar, Panpozhi [W.P.(MD)No.29522 of 2025, dated 17.04.2026]. This Court considered the purport of Section 22-A(2), the need to balance the Constitutional Right of the owners of the property under Article 300-A with the enforcement of development control legislation and the rules framed thereunder. It held that, irrespective of the location of the land, if the executant and the claimant of the document express an intention to use the property as such, without converting its nature, then, irrespective of the size of the land, boundary, abutting a pathway/road, etc., the document shall be registered, on condition that affidavits in four sets be executed and filed before this Court, the Sub-Registrar, the local body and the TANGEDCO. It is made clear that the party breaching the undertaking will also be liable for contempt of this Court, in addition to other actions.

3. The affidavit containing the following undertaking shall be executed by the claimant in whose favour the title vests under the document:

''I undertake not to use the property as a residential/commercial site or such other change of user, unless due permission is obtained from the planning authority. Without due approval, I will not develop the site by changing its use, and will not put up any residential or commercial building. I am aware that I may be liable to punishment for contempt of Court for violating this undertaking. I am also aware that I will not be entitled to claim electricity connection or water, sewerage, and other connections or services from the local authority or any other authority unless due conversion is made as per the permission of the planning authority.''

4. This writ petition is allowed on the following terms:

(i) The impugned order shall stand set aside.

(ii) The claimant under the document refused for registration, in whose name the property vests, shall execute a duly notarised affidavit in four sets and file one set before this Court within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the web copy of this order; Only upon filing of the same, a certified copy of this order shall be issued to the petitioner.

(iii) Along with the certified copy of the order of this Court, the petitioner will be entitled to represent the document along with three sets of affidavits.

(iv) Upon represe

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