Mariyammal v. The District Registrar (Administration)

O R D E R This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned order passed by the first respondent through proceedings in Na.Ka.No. 3529/A2/2020, dated 02.11.2021.

¶2The case of the petitioner is that she had purchased the subject property through a registered sale deed dated 28.01.2020, registered on the file of the Joint Sub Registrar No.IV, Madurai South. The grievance of the petitioner is that the second respondent had filed an application before the first respondent on the ground that a fraudulent document has been executed in favour of the petitioner and based on the same, the impugned order was passed by the first respondent.

¶3The main ground on which the petitioner has questioned the order passed by the first respondent is that the order was passed without affording an opportunity to the petitioner and thereby, it has adversely affected the right and title of the petitioner over the subject property. Accordingly, this Writ Petition has been filed before this Court.

¶4Heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶5In the considered view of this Court, the petitioner has an efficacious and alternative remedy of appeal before the Deputy Inspector General of Registration and the same has also been mentioned in the impugned order passed by the first respondent. However, the petitioner has attempted to maintain this Writ Petition on the ground that no notice was issued to the petitioner and that the impugned order suffers from violation of principles of natural justice.

¶6On carefully going through the order, it is seen that the notice was in fact issued to the petitioner and the relevant portion in the order is extracted hereunder: "kDjhuu;

jpUkjp.Mde;jp

\h vd;gtUf;F

19.10.2020

ehspl;lfbjj;jpd; thapyhf 30.11.2020 md;W tprhuizf;F M[uhff; Nfhup mwptpg;G mDg;gg;gl;lJ. kDjhuu; jpUkjp>Mde;jp \h vd;gtu; rhu;ghf mtuJ tof;fwpQu; jpU.KfkJ Ri`y; vd;gtu; M[uhfp jq;fs; jug;G thjj;jpid vOj;Jg;G+u;tkhf

rku;g;gpj;jhu;. vjpu;kDjhuu;fshd

jpUkjp.M.khupak;khs;. jpU.K.moF> jpU.R.tpf;uk; kw;Wk; jpU. K.tp[a gpufh\; MfpNahUf;F 01.12.2020 md;W tprhuizf;F ehspl;lmwptpg;gpd; top M[uhff; Nfhup mwptpg;G. mDg;gg;gl;lJ. vtUk; tprhuizf;F M[uhfhj epiyapy;. vjpu;kDjhuu;fspy; 30.12.2020 ehspl;lfbjtop

21.01.2021 md;W tprhuizf;F M[uhff; Nfhup ,Wjp mwptpg;G mDg;gg;gl;lJ. Gfhu; Njjpatprhuizf;F

M[uhftpy;iy. vjpu;kDkhuu;fspy; vtUk; 21.01.2021 Njjpa tprhuizf;F M[uhftpy;iy."

¶7It is clear from the above that the notice was issued to the petitioner and in spite of the same, no one appeared during the enquiry. The enquiry was also adjourned more than two occassions to enable the petitioner to participate in the enquiry. In spite of the same, the petitioner had chosen not to participate in the enquiry. In the instant case, the allegation is that there was impersonation and the relevant video footage also showed that a different person had come and executed the document. It is in the light of this allegation, the complaint was given by the second respondent. Hence, the petitioner ought to have participated in the enquiry and established that there was no impersonation in this case. In the absence of the same, there was a silent witness by means of video footage that was available to the authority and that by itself formed the basis for passing the impugned order.

¶8This Court finds that there is no violation of principles of natural justice, since the notice was served on the petitioner and she had chosen not to participate in the enquiry. Therefore, since an efficacious and alternative remedy is available by way of an appeal, this Writ Petition cannot be entertained.

¶9In the result, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

24.11.2023 NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no tsg To The District Registrar (Administration), Madurai South, Madurai. N.ANAND VENKATESH, J tsg

24.11.2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 24.11.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH and W.M.P.(MD).No.17384 of 2021 Mariyammal ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The District Registrar (Administration), Madurai South, Madurai. 2.M.Anandhi Shah ...Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, call for the records pertaining to the impugned order of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.3529/A2/2020, dated 02.11.2021 and quash the same as illegal. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Palani For R-1 : Mr.A.K.Manikkam, Special Government Pleader For R-2 : Mr.Mohammed Imran, for M/s.Ajmal Associates