VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

Chaikdavoud Marecar v. The District Collector

DISMISSED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
19 February 2026
Bench
Senthilkumar Ramamoorthyauthor
Case no.
WP 2868/2026

Judgment

ORDER The petitioner asserts that he is the owner of 3251 sq.ft of land and building in R.S.No.77/1 Part. He also states that his father had filed O.S.No.29 of 1984 in respect of the subject property. After the dismissal of the suit, it is stated that a first appeal and second appeal were filed, and that the second appeal was dismissed by holding that the property belongs to his father. Upon coming to know that fraudulent Settlement Deed dated 06.11.1995 bearing Document No.1630 of 1995 was registered, the present writ petition has been filed seeking deletion of such entry.

2.

Mr.V.Vasanthakumar,

learned

Additional

Government Pleader(Pondicherry), appears on behalf of the respondents 1 to 4. He submits Page3 of 5 that the petitioner should work out his remedies in the jurisdictional civil court. He also submits that the Registering Officer does not have the power of cancellation.

¶3Mr.R.Natarajan, learned counsel, appears on behalf of the 6th respondent. He submits that the petitioner is guilty of suppressing material facts relating to the ongoing civil litigation between the parties. He submits that O.S.No.114 of 2023, on the file of the Hon'ble Principal District Munsif, Karaikal, is pending and he also submits that S.A.No.679 of 2008 is pending on the file of this Court. He adds that Document No.1630 of 1995 is within the scope of such Second Appeal.

¶4The grievance of the petitioner relates to allegedly fraudulent Settlement Deed dated 06.11.1995 bearing Document No.1630 of 1995. After submitting representation dated 28.04.2025 seeking cancellation thereof, the present writ petition has been filed in January 2026. While the Limitation Act does not apply to proceedings under Article 226, laches is a material consideration.

¶5The affidavit contains no explanation for the inordinate delay. In addition, the issues raised by the petitioner turn on disputed questions of fact and the appropriate forum for the consideration thereof is the jurisdictional civil Page4 of 5 court. Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed by leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional civil court or prosecute any pending proceedings before such court. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 19-02-2026 (2/2) Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order kak To

¶1The District Collector Puducherry District, Puducherruy.

¶2The District Registrar Office of the District Registrar, Karaikal District, Puducherry,

¶3The Sub-Registrar office of the Sub-Registrar, Karaikal Sub Registrar Office, Karaikal District, Pondicherry.

¶4The Tahisldar Office of the Tahsildar Karaikkal District, Pondicherry WPoNo.o2868oofo2026 SENTHILKUMARoRAMAMOORTHY,oJ. kak WPoNo.o2868oofo2026 (2/2) 19-02-2026 Page5oofo5

Case details

Parties and counsel

Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 19-02-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY and W.M.P.No.3189 of 2026 Chaikdavoud Marecar No. 74, Lemaire Street, Karaikkal, Pondicherry. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The District Collector, Puducherry District, Puducherruy. 2. The District Registrar, Office of the District Registrar, Karaikal District, Puducherry, 3. The Sub-Registrar, Office of the Sub-Registrar, Karaikal Sub Registrar Office, Karaikal District, Pondicherry. 4. The Tahisldar Office of the Tahsildar Karaikkal District, Pondicherry. 5. Asma Ummal W/o. Mr. S.M. Umar, Residing at No.52 Duplex Street, Karaikkal, Pondicherry. 6. Mohammed Mavsud Imran, S/o. Mr. Abdullah Maraikal, Residing at No.52, Duplex, Street, Karaikkal Pondicherry ..Respondent(s) Page2 of 5 Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, praying to direct the 2nd and 3rd Respondents to remove /delete the fraudulent entry made with respect to the Settlement Deed dated 06.11.1995 bearing document No.1630 of 1995 on the file of SRO Karaikkal With necessary adjudications within a fixed time frame. For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Arun For Respondent(s): Mr.V.Vasanthakumar Additional Government Pleader (Pondicherry) (For R1 to R4) Mr.R.Natarajan (For R6)

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.