Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

K.Boopalan vs The Inspector General Of Registration on 13 June, 2024

Author: N.Sathish Kumar

Bench: N.Sathish Kumar

                                                                    W.P. No.11249 of 2024



                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                             DATED: 13.06.2024

                                                  CORAM:

                             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

                                             W.P.No.11249 of 2024


                K.Boopalan                                            ... Petitioner

                                                     Vs

                1.The Inspector General of Registration
                  Santhome, Mylapore
                  Chennai

                2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration
                  Vellore Zone
                  Vellore

                3.The District Registrar
                  Cheyyaru
                  Thiruvannamalai District
                  Tamil Nadu

                4.The Registrar
                  Vembakkam Register Office
                  Thiruvannamalai District

                5.S.Saravanakumar                                     ... Respondents




                ________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                Page 1/7
                                                                                  W.P. No.11249 of 2024



                Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
                praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 1 to 4 to cancel
                the      sale     agreement   in   Document   No.347/2019,     Vembakkam        SRO,
                Thiruvannamalai District dated 01.03.2019.



                                        For Petitioner    : Mr.K.Manikandan

                                        For Respondents : Mr.P.Anandhakumar
                                                          Govt. Advocate for R1 to R4
                                                          R5 - Court notice returned


                                                         ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 4 to cancel the sale agreement registered as Document No.347 of 2019 on the file Vembakkam SRO, Thiruvannamalai District.

2. It is the case of the writ petitioner that he has entered into a sale agreement with one Boopalan for sale of his properties and the agreement was registered on 01.03.2019. An advance sale consideration of Rs.50.00 Lakhs has been received by the writ petitioner. During the existence of the said agreement, the agreement holder was arrested by the police in connection with ________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 2/7 W.P. No.11249 of 2024 an alleged crime under Section 409, 420 r/w 34 IPC. The sale agreement was also seized by the Investigating Agency and produced before the concerned court. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed a criminal revision case before this court in Crl. R.C. No.146 of 2022 wherein this court has disposed of the criminal revision case holding that there cannot be any hindrance entering into any transaction in respect of the property and observed that the offence registered against the agreement holder is not connected to the property of the petitioner. The petitioner has also pursuant to the order of this court, has deposited Rs.50.00 Lakhs advanced to him by the fifth respondent before the learned CCB & CBCID Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai and also received the document. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that the sale agreement entry is reflected in the encumbrance certificate.

3. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

4. At the outset, this court is of the view that a mere entry relating to the sale agreement will not be a bar for the petitioner to deal with his property. The entry is retained in the encumbrance certificate only to show the nature of transaction. Therefore, the mere entry reflected in the encumbrance certificate ________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 3/7 W.P. No.11249 of 2024 in respect of the sale agreement will not be a bar for alienating the property or executing any document by the petitioner. Therefore, the question of cancelling the agreement by the registering authority does not arise at all. It is also made clear that a mere entry in the encumbrance certificate relating to the agreement entered in the year 2019 will not be a bar for the petitioner to deal with the property. He can very well deal with his property, in whatsoever manner he likes.

5. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

13.06.2024 Speaking order / Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No Asr To

1.The Inspector General of Registration Santhome, Mylapore Chennai

2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration Vellore Zone Vellore ________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 4/7 W.P. No.11249 of 2024

3.The District Registrar Cheyyaru Thiruvannamalai District Tamil Nadu

4.The Registrar Vembakkam Register Office Thiruvannamalai District

5.The Government Pleader High Court, Madras ________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 5/7 W.P. No.11249 of 2024 N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

Asr W.P.No.11249 of 2024 13.06.2024 ________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 6/7 W.P. No.11249 of 2024 ________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 7/7