1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 01.08.2022

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

W.P.No.11617 of 2016

and

WMP.No.27008 of 2022

1. Gurumurthi

2. Sangeetha @ Anbe Sangeetha

... petitioners

-Vs-

1 The District Registrar

Puducherry

2 Mohanasundaram Rajamani

3 Sibuhathulla

4 Abdulla

5 Abdul Kafoor

6 The Sub Registrar

Pondicherry

7 Umukulseem

8 Mariyam Riluvana

9. Habee Bullah Shibil

10. Safiya Sultana

11. Minor Shakriullah Fahim

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2

(Respondents 7 to 11 have impleaded

by this Court dated 01.08.2022 vide

WMP. No.27008 of 2018)

... Respondents

Prayer

: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance

of Writs of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the 1st

respondent in proceedings DRP.No.3/2016 dated 04.03.2016 and to quash the

same as unconstitutional, illegal , incompetent and without jurisdiction.

For petitioner

: Mr.N.Ganesh

For Respondents : Mr. J.Kumaran, AGP RR1 & 6

Mr.K.Sukumaran RR2 to 5 & 7 to 11

O R D E R

The writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in

DRP.No.3/2016, dated 04.03.2016 by the first respondent.

2. The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners are husband and

wife. The property measuring an extent of 2324 sq.ft. was originally belonged to

one Packiri @ Krishnasamy and he died intestate on 19.03.1960 leaving behind

his wife Thaiammal, who also died intestate in the year 1963 and six daughters

viz., Vimala, Sakunthala, Shantha, Padma, Jaya and Uma. While so, one of the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

3

daughters viz., Vimala filed a suit in C.S.No.176/1964 before this Court and as

per the judgment of this Court, dated 19.08.1966, the property was allotted to

other daughters excluding Shakunthala. Thereafter, the said Padma and Jaya had

executed a power of attorney (POA) on 10.09.2003 in favour of the first

petitioner in respect of their shares. The said power was allegedly cancelled on

04.03.2006 under document No.233/B4/2006 in the office of the Sub Registrar,

Oulgaret. Though the cancellation of POA was informed to the first petitioner,

he entered into a sale agreement with one Sangeetha, who is none other than his

wife, on 09.07.2005. Therefore, the respondents 2 to 5 have filed a suit in

O.S.No.897 of 2013 on the file of the I Additional District Munsif, Pondicherry

in relation to 2324 sq.ft. Since it was processed, the second petitioner filed Lok

Adalat Case No.2675/2008 and the the same was settled before the Lok Adalat

under Award dated 23.06.2008. The said award was registered before the Sub

Registrar on 11.11.2008. Thereafter, a sale deed was executed by the first

petitioner in favour of the second petitioner on 20.02.2009 in document

No.592/2009, document No.895/2009 dated 12.03.2009 and document

No.351/2011 dated 25.01.2011. Thereafter, the first petitioner has entered into

another sale agreement with his brother viz., Ganesh on 15.12.2005. However,

the said sale agreement was not processed and therefore, the first petitioner's

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

4

brother filed a suit in O.S.No.63/2007 in respect of 924 sq.ft. in which, a written

statement was filed by the first petitioner stating that POA was cancelled on

04.03.2006. Thus the first petitioner alienated the property based on the other

documents including the Lok Adalat Award passed in the year 2008 in favour of

the second petitioner. In the interregnum, the respondents 2 to 5 have made a

complaint before the first respondent against the petitioners to cancel the sale

deeds which were executed by the first petitioner in favour of the second

petitioner. Without considering the real facts, the first respondent has cancelled

the sale deeds vide proceedings dated 04.03.2016. Challenging the same, the

petit