M.Prashanth vs the District Registrar

M.Prashanth vs The District Registrar

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Feb 17, 2025

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1754567

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1754567
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr Justice N. Anand Venkatesh
Decided On: Feb 17, 2025
Case Number: WP/4705/2025

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

M.Prashanth

Respondent

The District Registrar

Excerpt

in the high court of judicature at madrasdated : 17.02.2025coramthe honourable mr. justice n. anand venkateshm.prashanth ... petitioner vs. krishnagiri. ... respondents prayer : writ petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representations dated 07.10.2024 and 11.01.2025 and cancel sale deed executed by mr.sonnappa bearing document no.3163/1960 dated 22.06.1960 sub registrar hosur within the time stipulated.for petitioner : ms.g.devi for respondents : mr.p.harish government advocateorderthis writ petition has been filed for issue of writ of mandamus directing the respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 07.10.2024, wherein, the petitioner is seeking for cancellation of the sale deed executed in the year 1960, within the time frame fixed by this court. 2.heard ms.g.devi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and mr.p.harish, learned government advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent.3.in the considered view of this court, the power that was available to the respondent to cancel the document under section 77a of the registration act has already been held to be unconstitutional by this court in the judgement in m.kathirvel vs. the inspector general of registration, department of registration and others reported in 2024 4 ctc 769. in view of the same, there is no scope for giving a direction to the respondent to deal with the representation. if the petitioner has any grievance regarding the sale deed, the petitioner has to necessarily workout his remedy before the competent civil court in the manner known to law.4.this writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. no costs. internet : yes index : yesspeaking order / non speaking orderssr to krishnagiri.n. anand venkatesh, j.ssr

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.02.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
M.Prashanth ... Petitioner Vs. Krishnagiri. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representations dated 07.10.2024 and 11.01.2025 and cancel sale deed executed by Mr.Sonnappa bearing document No.3163/1960 dated 22.06.1960 Sub Registrar Hosur within the time stipulated.
For Petitioner : Ms.G.Devi For Respondents : Mr.P.Harish Government Advocate

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for issue of writ of mandamus directing the respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 07.10.2024, wherein, the petitioner is seeking for cancellation of the Sale Deed executed in the year 1960, within the time frame fixed by this Court. 2.Heard Ms.G.Devi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr.P.Harish, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent.

3.In the considered view of this Court, the power that was available to the respondent to cancel the document under Section 77A of the Registration Act has already been held to be unconstitutional by this Court in the judgement in M.Kathirvel vs. The Inspector General of Registration, Department of Registration and others reported in 2024 4 CTC 769. In view of the same, there is no scope for giving a direction to the respondent to deal with the representation. If the petitioner has any grievance regarding the Sale Deed, the petitioner has to necessarily workout his remedy before the competent Civil Court in the manner known to law.

4.This writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No Costs. Internet : Yes Index : Yes

Speaking Order / Non Speaking Order

ssr To Krishnagiri.

N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.

ssr

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2025 Same Parties M.Prashanth vs The District Registrar Same Judge Honourable Mr Justice N. Anand Venkatesh