C.Karikalan v. The Sub Registrar

ORDER This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the refusal check slip in RFL/Kadamalaikundu/2/2026, dated 07.01.2026, issued by the respondent and to direct the respondent to register the sale deed submitted by the petitioner.

¶2Mr.M.Lingadurai, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondent.

¶3By consent on either sides, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶4The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner intends to purchase 26.75 cents of punja land from one P.Malairajan and when sale deed to that effect was presented before the respondent, they refused to register the same stating that several plots adjacent to the subject land were registered to the extent of 5 cents. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner's vendor purchased the land to the extent of 28 cents on 23.02.2024 and now, the petitioner intends to purchase 26.75 cents from his vendor, which is a punja land. The learned counsel has also produced photographs to the effect that the subject land and nearby lands are all agricultural lands.

¶5The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent would submit that since there is a bar under Section 22 A of the Registration Act, the impugned order came to be passed.

¶6I have given due consideration to the submissions made on either sides.

¶7The petitioner intends to purchase 26.75 cents out of 28 cents purchased by the petitioner's vendor. In the present case, remaining 1.25 cents was sold by the petitioner's vendor to a third party, since it is a pathway. The 26.75 cents, which the petitioner intends to purchase appears to be agricultural land. If is the same is divided into more than 8 plots , then it can be considered as layout. However, that is not so. The petitioner intends to purchase punja land of 26.75 cents out of 28 cents, as a whole and hence, the question of selling the same by forming plots would not come into picture. In future, if the petitioner intends to sell the subject land as plots, at that time, the respondent can restrain the petitioner from doing so.

¶8In view of the above discussions, the refusal check slip in RFL/Kadamalaikundu/2/2026, dated 07.01.2026, issued by the respondent is set aside. The petitioner is directed to re-present the document to the respondent for registration and upon re-presentation, the respondent is directed to register the same, if it is otherwise in order.

¶9In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed. No costs.

27.01.2026 Speaking / Non-speaking order Index : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No mbi To The Sub-Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar, Kadamalaikundu, Theni District.

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J. mbi

27.01.2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.01.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY C.Karikalan ...Petitioner vs. The Sub-Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar, Kadamalaikundu, Theni District. ...Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified mandamus calling for the refusal check slip in RFL/Kadamalaikundu/2/2026 dated 07.01.2026 issued by the respondent and quash the same, consequently direct the respondent to register the sale deed submitted by the petitioner within the time stipulated by this court. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Malaikani For Respondent : Mr.M.Lingadurai, Special Government Pleader