- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 6 July 2026
- Bench
- Krishnan Ramasamy
- Case no.
- WP 25370/2026
Follow Madras High CourtFollow Krishnan Ramasamy
Judgment
ORDER The present Writ Petition has been filed challenging the Refusal Check Slip dated 02.05.2026 issued by the 2nd respondent refusing to register the order of this Court dated 10.06.2025 passed in W.P. No.11623 of 2024, which is filed by the petitioner. By the said order, this Court had set aside the Settlement Cancellation Deed dated 26.09.2005 and the consequential Sale Deed dated
28.10.2005.
¶2The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that when the petitioner presented the certified copy of the order dated 10.06.2025 for registration and incorporation of the necessary entries in the registration records, the 2nd respondent refused to entertain the same and issued the impugned Refusal Check Slip. Page2 of 5
¶3Per contra, the learned Government Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the respondents have no objection to making appropriate entries in the relevant registers on the strength of the order dated
10.06.2025 passed by this Court in W.P. No.11623 of 2024, whereby the Settlement Cancellation Deed dated 26.09.2005 and the consequential Sale Deed dated 28.10.2005 were set aside. He further submitted that suitable entries would be made in the registration records so as to nullify the effect of the aforesaid documents in accordance with the order of this Court.
¶4In response, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner fairly submitted that it would suffice if the respondents make suitable entries in the registration records based on the order passed by this Court.
¶5In view of the above submission made by the learned Government Counsel, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned Refusal Check Slip dated 02.05.2026. Accordingly, the same is set aside. The petitioner is directed to re-present the certified copy of the order dated 10.06.2025 passed in W.P. No.11623 of 2024 before the jurisdictional Registering Authority. Upon such presentation, the 2nd respondent shall make appropriate entries in the relevant registers, giving effect to the order of this Court by recording that the Settlement Page3 of 5 Cancellation Deed dated 26.09.2005 and the consequential Sale Deed dated
28.10.2005 stand set aside, and thereby nullify their effect in the registration records. The said exercise shall be completed within two (2) weeks from the date of receiving the petitioner's documents
¶6With the above directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 06-07-2026 Asi To
¶1The District Registrar Salem West, Salem district
¶2The Sub Registrar Tharamangalam, Salem district Page4 of 5 WPoNo.o25370oofo2026 KRISHNANoRAMASAMY,oJ. Asi WPoNo.o25370oofo2026 06-07-2026 Page5oofo5
Case details
Parties and counsel
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY Iyyandurai S/o. Chinnuswamy, Panangkattur, Pappambadi Village, Omalur Taluk, Salem district ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The District Registrar Salem West, Salem district 2. The Sub Registrar Tharamangalam, Salem district ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned Refusal Check Slip No. RFL/ Tharamangalam/10/2026 dated 2.05.2026 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to receive file and register the order dated 10.06.2025 passed by this Court in WP No. 11623 of 2024 and make necessary entries in Page1 of 5 the relevant registration records, Indexed and Encumbrance Register so as to reflect in the Encumbrance Certificate that the settlement cancellation deed dated 26.09.2005 registered as Document No. 2413/ 2005 and the consequential sale deed dated 28.10.2005 registered as Document No. 2653/ 2005 on the file of the second respondent have been declared void and non-est by this Court. For Petitioner(s): Mr. M. Sudhan For Respondent(s): Mr. M. Roshan Atiq Government Counsel
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.