Arulmigu Vishweswara Swamy v. A.R.Shanmugasundaram @ A.R.Shanmugham

JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by Dr.G.Jayachandran J.) A vast extent of land owned by appellant was attempted to be alienated by a third party. This prompted the Executive Officer of the appellant temple to intimate to the jurisdictional Sub-Registrar not to entertain any sale deed alienating the properties covered under the annexure to the representation. This annexure contained approximately 36 properties, detailing their survey numbers and extents, for the information of the Sub Registrar to stop registration of those properties over which the temple claims title.

¶2This communication, issued by the appellant on 20.06.2022, was acted upon by the Sub-Registrar vide proceedings dated 11.11.2024. While so, one A.R.Shanmugasundaram @ A.R.Shanmugham approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the communication issued by the appellant dated 20.06.2022 and the proceedings issued by the Sub-Registrar on 11.11.2024 and consequently to direct the Sub-Registrar to entertain the sale deed presented by him for registration in respect of the property under survey No.292/1 (New Survey No.292/1B1B), Nallur Village, Tiruppur District. Page3 of 6

¶3The learned Single Judge, after appreciating the documents produced on either side, concluded that the survey number for which the writ petitioner seeks registration had already been assigned in favour of the writ petitioner during the Settlement Tahsildar proceedings conducted on 23.08.1971 and subsequent proceedings. Furthermore, in an earlier writ petition where the temple had made a claim in respect of different survey numbers for which patta was granted by the Settlement Tahsildar, the Court had granted liberty to the temple to challenge the same. Accordingly, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and directed the Sub-Registrar to accept the sale deed and register the same. However, in the course of allowing the writ petition, the learned Single Judge quashed the communication of the Executive Officer (the appellant herein) as well as the proceedings of the Sub-Registrar, which covers not only the survey numbers of the writ petitioner but also other survey numbers where no dispute or claim has been raised by the third parties. Therefore, we find merit in the writ appeal preferred by the temple.

¶4Though the writ petitioner has title by virtue of the patta issued by the Settlement Tahsildar, if the temple wants to claim any right over the property, it must establish the same before the civil Court in the manner known to law. The rights and privilege existing in favour of the writ petitioner cannot be extended to the other survey numbers. Unfortunately, the learned Single Judge, by quashing the communication of the Executive Officer and the proceedings of the Sub-Registrar, has opened the floodgates for the registration Page4 of 6 of other properties falling under the remaining survey numbers, which are 36 in number. The learned Single Judge ought to have restricted the relief only to the specific survey numbers and the sub-divisions which is the subject matter of the writ petition.

¶5We therefore, clarify the order of the learned Single Judge and hold that the direction to register the sale deeds presented by the writ petitioner A.R.Shanmugasundaram @ A.R.Shanmugham, alone will be covered by the order and not the other survey numbers which form part of the communication of the proceedings of the Sub-Registrar. We make it clear that the Sub-Registrar concerned need not entertain any sale documents pertaining to the other survey numbers mentioned in the annexure provided by the Executive Officer. We further clarify that if the temple has any right in the specific survey numbers which is the subject matter of the two sale deeds of the 1st respondent, it is always open to the temple to ascertain its rights in the manner known to law by approaching the civil Court, subject to the laws of limitation and other legal constraints.

¶6With the above observations, this Writ Appeal is partly allowed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. (Dr.G.J.,J.) (N.M.,J.) 29-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order rpl Page5 of 6 To

1.The Joint Commissioner Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Tiruppur - 638 004, Tiruppur District.

2.The Sub Registrar Sub Registrar Office, Nallur, Tiruppur District. WAoNo.o2238oofo2026 DR.G.JAYACHANDRANoJ. and N.MALAoJ. rpl WritoAppealoNo.o2238oofo2026 and C.M.P.No.o19385oofo2026 29-07-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 29-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE N. MALA Writ Appeal No. 2238 of 2026 and C.M.P.No. 19385 of 2026 Arulmigu Vishweswara Swamy Vishalakshiamman, Subramania Swamy Thirukoil, Rep.by its Executive Officer, Nallur, Tiruppur Taluk, Tiruppur District. ..Appellant Vs 1. A.R.Shanmugasundaram @ A.R.Shanmugham 2. The Joint Commissioner Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Tiruppur - 638 004, Tiruppur District. 3. The Sub Registrar Sub Registrar Office, Nallur, Tiruppur District. ..Respondents Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, to set aside the order passed in WP No.38505 of 2024 dated 17.12.2024 and thus render justice. For Appellant: Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan For Respondents: Mr.T.Balahi FOR R1 Page2 of 6 Mr.V.Chandra Prabu Government Advocate (HR & CE) FOR R2 Mr.K.Surendar Government Advocate FOR R3