Advocates:
['M/S G RAJATHI', 'M/S IYER & THOMAS', '', 'H KARTHIK SESHADRI', 'ELIZABETH SESHADRI', 'FOR RR TO', 'R THE SUB-REGISTRAR', 'PONNERI', 'THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT', 'R- THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION', 'STATE OF TAMIL NADU', 'SANTHOME HIGH ROAD', 'MYLAPORE', 'CHENNAI', 'SS PETITION AND AFFIDAVIT', 'DUE REG R', 'NOT READY IN NOTICE REG R']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 07.10.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA

AND

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

W.A.No.263 of 2013

Thamiraparani Investments Ltd.,

rep by its Director Mr.P.Ram Mohan

Flat No.A2, I Floor

“Srishti's Crescendo”

No.24, Desika Road

Mylapore

Chennai 600 004

..Appellant

-vs-

1. The Sub Registrar

Ponneri

Tiruvallur District

2. The Inspector General of Registration

No.100, Santhome High Road

Pattinapakkam

Chennai 600 028

3. Citrex Products Limited

rep by its Director Mr.K.Balasubramanian

“Atkinson Palace” 2-F-1

No.2, Jyothi Venkatachalam Road

Vepery, Chennai 600 007

4. V.Rajendran

5. Sathish Raj

6. M/s Metafilms (India) Ltd.,

No.157/1, GNT Road

Chinnambedu Post

Kavarapet 601 206

..Respondents

Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against

the order dated 17.04.2012 made in W.P.No.24554 of 2011.

Prayer in W.P.No.24554 of 2011: Writ petition filed under

Article 226 of the constitution of India, praying for the

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the

respondents 1 and 2 to cancel the registration of the amendment

deeds registered as Document Nos.377-379 of 2009 on the file of

the Respondents No.1.

For Appellant

::

Mr.R.Subramanian for

M/s G.Rajathi

For Respondents

::

Mr.T.Arunkumar

Government Advocate for

R1 & R2

R3-No appearance

Ms.A.Saranya for

M/s Iyer & Thomas for

R4 to R6

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by T.RAJA, J.)

This writ appeal has been filed by M/s Thamiraparani

Investments Limited against the impugned order dated 17.4.2012

passed in Writ Petition No.24554 of 2011, wherein the prayer for

issuance of a mandamus directing the respondents 1 & 2 to cancel

the registration of the amendment deeds registered as Document

Nos.377-379 of 2009 on the file of the Sub Registrar, Ponneri,

was refused.

2. The case of the appellant/writ petitioner briefly runs

thus:_

M/s Citrex Products Limited, the third respondent herein was

originally the owner of larger extent of 30.8 acres of land in

Thatchur and Peravallur villages in Tiruvallur District. After

entering into a sale agreement with the appellant in respect of

25.8 acres out of 30.8 acres of land, it is stated that the

third respondent had handed over possession to the appellant. It

is also stated that after receipt of the entire sale

consideration, the third respondent also executed a Power of

Attorney in respect of the said extent of land in favour of the

nominees of the appellant. Subsequently, the execution of three

sale deeds pertaining to an extent of 11 acres having been

fraudulently made by Mr.V.Rajendran and Mr.R.Satish Raj, the

respondents 4 & 5 on behalf of the third respondent, was found

out. Therefore, the execution of the above sale deeds were

challenged in O.S.No.57 of 2004 before the Sub Court, Ponneri

and the said suit has been now transferred and pending in re-

numbered O.S.No.140 of 2020 before the Sub Court, Poonamallee.

Since the appellant got registered the balance extent of 14.8

acres of land under a sale deed registered as Document No.97 of

2005 in the office of the Sub Registrar, Ponneri during the

pendency of the above suit proceedings, steps were taken to

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

amend the sale deeds for 10 acres together with another sale

deed executed in favour of the sixth respondent for 5 acres, in

January, 2009. Since the registration has been done without

proper enquiry, the appellant filed the writ petition praying

for a direction directing the respondents 1 & 2 to cancel the

registration of the amendment deeds registered as Document

Nos.377-379 of 2009 on the file of the Sub Registrar, Ponneri.

The learned single Judge, after hearing both sides, has refused

to accept the case of the appellant/writ petitioner. Aggrieved