C.Velusamy v. The Sub Registrar

ORDER This writ petition has been filed to forebear the first respondent from registering any document pertaining to the property morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition.

¶2The petitioner claims that he is having the benefit of a Judgment and Decree dated 29.02.2012 passed in O.S. No.84 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Palladam in his favour, restraining the respondents 2 and 3 from alienating the property morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition. Therefore, the petitioner had filed a protest petition before the first respondent, requesting them not to register any document pertaining to the property morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition.

¶3According to the petitioner, despite the civil Court judgment and decree obtained by the petitioner in his favour against the respondents 2 and 3, the respondents 2 and 3 are attempting to register the documents before the first respondent. The petitioner also relies upon an endorsement made by the first respondent, requesting the petitioner to get further orders from the civil Court.

¶4Admittedly, a protest petition has been filed by the petitioner with the first respondent, opposing registration of any document pertaining to the property morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition. When a protest petition has been filed, and when a civil Court judgment has been passed in favour of the petitioner, as stated supra, necessarily, the first respondent will have to hear the petitioner whenever any document is presented for registration pertaining to the property morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition by the respondents 2 and 3.

¶5Since no adverse orders are passed against the respondents 2 and 3, notice to the respondents 2 and 3 is dispensed with by this Court.

¶6Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the first respondent to put on notice the petitioner and permit him to raise all objections available to him under law, when any document is presented by the respondents 2 and 3 for registration pertaining to the property morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition and only, after giving due consideration to the objections raised by the petitioner, the first respondent shall take a final decision as to whether the document presented by the respondents 2 and 3 can be registered or not. No Costs. 27-04-2026 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes ab To

1.The Sub Registrar Sub Registrar office, Karumathampatti, Coimbatore district ABDUL QUDDHOSE J. ab

27-04-2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27-04-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE 1. C.Velusamy s/o. Late. Chellappa Gounder, No.24 Dapedar Street, Kattoor, Coimbatore Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The Sub Registrar Sub Registrar office, Karumathampatti, Coimbatore district 2.Eswaran 3.Marathal Respondent(s) PRAYER Forbearing the 1st respondent from registering any Document with respect to the land to an extent of 0.57 cents on the southern side in SF No. 870A situated at Samalapuram village, Palladam Taluk, Tiruppur district subject in judgment and decree dated 29.02.2012 made in OS No. 84/ 2004 on the file of District Munsif Court, Palladam on the basis of the petitioner protest petition dated 13.04.2026 For Petitioner(s): Mr.P.Saravana Sowmiyan For Respondent(s): Mr.P.Harish Govt.Advocate For R1 ND/W - R2 and R3 -Pvt