Dr.N.Nagappan v. Inspector General of Registration

Order This writ petition has been filed to direct the second respondent to make an entry or endorsement in his records to either remove the entry relating to the alleged fraudulent settlement deed dated 10.01.2013 registered as Document No.326 of 2013 on the file of the SRO, Kundrathur as per clause (b) of the judgement and decree dated 06.07.2023 in O.S. No.2 of 2020 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sriperumbudur, or in the alternative to make an entry that the said document has been declared as null and void and unenforceable as per Clause (a) of the judgement and decree dated 06.07.2023 passed in O.S. No.2 of 2020.

2.The petitioner claims that by virtue of the said judgment and decree dated 06.07.2023 passed in O.S. No.2 of 2020 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sriperumbudur, the settlement deed dated 10.01.2013 registered as Document No.326 of 2013 has been declared as null and void. The petitioner claims that he is the absolute owner of the property, morefully disclosed in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition, which was also the subject matter of the suit in O.S. No.2 of 2020 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sriperumbudur. According to the petitioner, since the settlement deed dated

10.01.2013 registered as Document No.326 of 2013 on the file of the SRO, Kundrathur has been declared as null and void by the District Munsif Court, Page3 of 6 Sriperumbudur by its judgment and decree dated 06.07.2023 in O.S. No.2 of 2020, the prayer sought for in this writ petition has to be granted in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner had given representation earlier for the very same purpose to the respondents. Since those representations were not considered, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing this petition.

3.Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. At the outset, he would submit that since the representation earlier given by the counsel for the petitioner was an old one, the petitioner will have to submit a fresh representation.

4.Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions would submit that the petitioner is willing to submit a fresh representation.

5.No prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the petitioner is directed to submit a fresh representation and the respondents are directed to consider the same, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving due consideration to the supporting documents produced by the petitioner, which includes the Civil Court judgment passed in petitioner's favour, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. Page4 of 6

6.For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the second respondent seeking for the prayer as sought for in this writ petition with the supporting documents, which includes the judgment and decree dated 06.07.2023 in O.S. No. 2 of 2020 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sriperumbudur, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the same within the stipulated time, the second respondent shall take a final decision with regard to the request of the petitioner, after giving due consideration to the supporting documents produced by the petitioner within a period of 2 weeks thereafter. In case the second respondent decides to reject the petitioner's request, the second respondent shall pass a speaking order, after giving due consideration to the contentions of the petitioner as well as the supporting documents produced by him. No costs. 23-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order VGA Page5 of 6 To

¶1Inspector General of Registration Santhome High Road, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004

¶2Sub Registrar Kundrathur WPoNo.o10377oofo2026 ABDULoQUDDHOSEoJ. VGA WPoNo.o10377oofo2026 23-03-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE Dr.N.Nagappan ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. Inspector General of Registration Santhome High Road, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004 2. Sub Registrar Kundrathur ..Respondent(s) directing the second respondent to make an entry or endorsement in his records to either remove the entry relating to the fraudulent settlement deed dated 10.1.2013 registered as Document No.326 of 2013 on the file of the S.R.O.Kundrathur as per clause (b) of the Judgement and decree dated 6.7.2023 in O.S.No.2 of 2020 of the District Munsif, Sriperumbudur or in the alternative to make an entry that the said document had been declared as null and void and unenforceable in law as per clause (a) of the Judgement and decree of the District Munsif, Sriperumbudur dated 6.7.2023 in O.S.No.2 of 2020 and consequently forbearing the second respondent from issuing any encumbrance certificate showing the fraudulent settlement deed dated 10.1.2013 registered as Document No.326 of 2013 an encumbrance over the property belonging to the petitioner. For Petitioner(s): Mr.A.S.Vijayragavan For Respondent(s): Mr.U.Baranidharan,SGP Page2 of 6