Madras High Court
A.Mahendraselvan vs The Inspector General Of Registration on 22 July, 2015
Author: R.Mahadevan
Bench: R.Mahadevan
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 22.07.2015
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN
W.P.(MD)No.12619 of 2015
A.Mahendraselvan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
Chennai.
2.The District Registrar (Administration),
District Registrar Office,
Madurai South, Madurai.
3.P.Velmuruga Krishnan
4.Sivanandam @ Malli Chettiar
5.K.M.Vijayakumar
6.S.V.S.Veerasundara Mani ... Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to
conduct enquiry under circular 67 dated 3/11/2011 passed by the 1st
respondent in regard to the forged trust deeds dated 30.10.2000 bearing
document Nos.2740/2000, 2741/2000 in regard to the property comprised in Door
No.98, South Masi Street, Madurai, created by the respondents 3 and 4 and
cancel the same as the same has been registered by impersonation, production
of false documents on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated
6.7.2015.
!For Petitioner : Mr.R.G.Shankar Ganesh
For Respondents : Mr.T.R.Janarthanan,
Additional Govt. Pleader
for R1 and R2
:ORDER
This writ petition has been filed for a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to conduct enquiry under Circular 67 issued by the first respondent, with regard to the petitioner's property comprised in Door No.98, South Masi Street, Madurai.
2.It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition that in respect of the petitioner's property in question, some forged trust deeds were executed. Therefore, the petitioner states that enquiry has to be conducted into the matter to set right the defects, as per Circular No.67 of the Inspector General of Registration, Chennai, dated 03.11.2011. It is further stated that as per Circular No.67 dated 03.11.2011, the Inspector General of Registration, Chennai has empowered the District Registrars all over the State to conduct enquiries in respect of fraudulent transactions and for cancellation of the same if the same had been executed on impersonation and on other grounds. Now, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks the indulgence of this Court for a direction to the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 06.07.2015 and pass appropriate orders on merits in the light of Circular No.67, stated supra.
3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Advocate, who took notice for the respondents 1 and 2.
4.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 06.07.2015 on merits and in accordance with law, after due opportunity to the respondents 3 to 6 and the interested parties if any, as well as the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders in the light of Circular No.67 dated 03.11.2011 of the Inspector General of Registration, Chennai, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
To
1.The Inspector General of Registration, Chennai.
2.The District Registrar (Administration), District Registrar Office, Madurai South, Madurai. .