Senthil Muthu v. The Joint Sub Registrar No.3

ORDER The petitioner is a subsequent purchaser of a property measuring an extent of 2,325 square feet together with the superstructure standing thereon.

¶2The subject property originally formed part of a larger extent of land gifted by the fifth respondent to the sixth respondent under a Gift Deed executed in the year 1970. Pursuant thereto, the land comprised in Page No. 2 of 9 Old Survey No.51 Part, T.S.No.83 was developed into house plots and sold by the sixth respondent to various purchasers.

¶3The petitioner's vendor's mother, namely, Mrs.Saraswathy, purchased an extent of 4,650 square feet from the sixth respondent under a registered Sale Deed dated 29.03.1979, registered as Document No.706 of 1979.

¶4Subsequently, Mrs.Saraswathy alienated an extent of 2,325 square feet out of the said property in favour of one Mrs.Vasantha by a registered Sale Deed dated 27.05.1984. The remaining extent of 2,325 square feet continued to be retained by Mrs.Saraswathy.

¶5Thereafter, the retained extent devolved upon her son, who, as the petitioner's vendor, conveyed the same to the petitioner under a registered Sale Deed dated 23.09.2025. However, when the said document was presented for registration before the first respondent, the same was not registered. Instead, the first respondent issued the impugned Refusal Check Slip assigning the following reasons: ''jpUr;rpuhg;gs;sp khtl;lk; jpy;iyefu; Page No. 3 of 9 rhu;gjpthsu; mYtyfj;jpw;F cl;gl;l gioa thu;L 3> gioa ru;Nt vz;.51 part-f;F Gjpa thu;L -D (M)> Gjpa gpshf; 28> T.S.No.83-y; fl;Lg;gl;l 2325 rJub nrhj;jhdJ jpU.E.utp j/ng.Nyl;.<];tud; vd;gtuhy; jpU.nre;jpy; Kj;J j/ng.Nyl;.Kj;J vd;gtUf;F vOjp nfhLf;fg;gl;l fpiua Mtzk; ,t;tYtyfj;jpy; 23.09.2025 md;W jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;lJ. Nkw;gb jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;l fpiua Mtzj;jpy; fz;l nrhj;jpw;Fz;lhd Gjpa thu;L - M> Gjpa gpshf; 28> T.S.No.83-f;F tUtha;Jiw Mtzq;fshd TSLR rupghu;j;jNghJ epyj;jpd; tifg;gghl;L fhyj;jpy; ru;f;fhu;-Gwk;Nghf;F vd cs;sJ. NkYk;> Nkw;gb Online TSLR-y; gl;lhjhuupd; ngau; VJk; Fwpg;gplg;gltpy;iy vd;gjhy; tUtha; Jiwapy; epyj;jpd; jd;ik kw;Wk; gl;lhtpy; (TSLR) ngau; khw;wk; nra;J Mtzj;jpid kPs rku;g;gpf;f MtzjhuUf;F njuptpf;fg;gl;L Mtzk; kWj;jspf;fg;gLfpwJ''

¶6After the filing of the present Writ Petition, this Court, by order dated 27.10.2025 in W.M.P.(MD)No.23299 of 2025, impleaded the respondents 2 to 6. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the official respondents submitted that an enquiry is presently pending before the third respondent.

¶7It was further submitted on behalf of the official respondents that, as per the revenue records, the subject land continues to be classified as "Government Poramboke". It was contended that so long as the said classification remains in the revenue records, the sale deed presented by Page No. 4 of 9 the petitioner cannot be registered in view of Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, as inserted by the Tamil Nadu Act 28 of 2012 and brought into force with effect from 20.10.2016.

¶8Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the issue is no longer res integra and is squarely covered by the order of this Court in V.Meenakshi v. The District Registrar, Sivagangai and another [W.P.(MD) No.34875 of 2025, dated

02.12.2025].

¶9I have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the materials placed on record. I have also considered the decision of this Court in V.Meenakshi (cited supra). In my considered view, the impugned Refusal Check Slip cannot be sustained. The documents produced before this Court clearly establish that, pursuant to the Gift Deed executed by the fifth respondent in favour of the sixth respondent in the year 1970, the sixth respondent acquired title to the property and thereafter, alienated the land by way of registered sale deeds after forming residential plots. The Gift Deed dated 31.12.1970 was registered as Document No.3803 of 1970 (Volume 1169, Pages 183 to 189) in the Page No. 5 of 9 office of the Sub-Registrar III, Tiruchirappalli. The said title is also duly reflected in the registered Sale Deed dated 29.03.1979 executed by the sixth respondent in favour of the petitioner's vendor's mother, late Saraswathy, wife of Eswaran.

¶10If the revenue records continued to describe the land as "Government Poramboke", it was incumbent upon the revenue authorities to effect the necessary reclassification immediately after the execution of the Gift Deed in favour of the sixth respondent, particularly, when the land had thereafter been converted into residential plots and conveyed to several purchasers under registered sale deeds. The omission on the part of the revenue authorities to carry out the consequential changes in the revenue records cannot prejudice the rights of bona fide purchasers or constitute a valid ground for refusing registration of a document.

¶11In the above circumstances, this Court is inclined to allow the Writ Petition by directing the first respondent to register the Sale Deed presented by the petitioner on 23.09.2025, if it is otherwise in order and upon compliance with the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908, and the Rules framed thereunder. Page No. 6 of 9

¶12There shall also be a direction to the third respondent to carry out the necessary corrections in the revenue records by changing the classification of the subject land from "Government Poramboke" to "Residential Land", in accordance with law. It is further open to the petitioner to approach the respondents 2 and 3 for issuance of patta, whereupon the authorities shall consider such application on its own merits and in accordance with law.

¶13Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. NCC : Yes / No

30.06.2026 smn2

To

1.The Joint Sub Registrar No.3, Office of the Joint Sub Registrar No.3, Thillainagar, Trichy.

2.The District Revenue Officer, District Collectorate, Tiruchirappalli.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of Revenue Divisional Office, Collectorate, Tiruchirappalli. Page No. 7 of 9

4.The Tahsildar, Trichy West Taluk, Bharathidhasan Salai, Contonment, Trichy - 620 001.

5.The Commissioner, Tiruchirappalli City Corporation, Bharathidhasan Salai, Contonment, Trichy - 620 001.

6.Tiruchirappalli Co-Operative Housing Construction Society Ltd., No.1, Makkal Mandram, Main Road, Thillainagar, Tiruchirappalli - 620 018. Page No. 8 of 9 C.SARAVANAN

, J.

smn2

30.06.2026 Page No. 9 of 9

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 30.06.2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P.(MD)No.27653 of 2025 Senthil Muthu ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Joint Sub Registrar No.3, Office of the Joint Sub Registrar No.3, Thillainagar, Trichy. 2.The District Revenue Officer, District Collectorate, Tiruchirappalli. 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of Revenue Divisional Office, Collectorate, Tiruchirappalli. 4.The Tahsildar, Trichy West Taluk, Bharathidhasan Salai, Contonment, Trichy - 620 001. 5.The Commissioner, Tiruchirappalli City Corporation, Bharathidhasan Salai, Contonment, Trichy - 620 001. 6.Tiruchirappalli Co-Operative Housing Construction Society Ltd., No.1, Makkal Mandram, Main Road, Thillainagar, Tiruchirappalli - 620 018. Page No. 1 of 9 [R2 to R6 are impleaded vide order dated 27.10.2025 in W.M.P.(MD)No.27653 / 2025] ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certioarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned Refusal Check Slip No.RFL/Thillainagar/203/2025 dated 23.09.2025 issued by the respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondent to register the document presented by the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Karuna For R1 to R4 : Mr.S.Venkatesh Government Standing Counsel For R5 : Mr.B.E.Ashwin Bala Someshwarar for M/s.R.B. Law Associates For R6 : Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian