Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4.The petitioner further submits that the registration of the unapproved plots by the first respondent is against the public policy under the Registration Act. The 6th respondent had sold one of the plot bearing Plot No.22 in the said layout to one Krithivasan and Savithiri Krithivasan vide registered Sale Deed Doc.No.2504 of 2013 dated 10.07.2013. Likewise the 6th respondent had sold more than 30 plots in the above lay-out. As the said sale deeds are forged documents, it becomes necessary for the first respondent not to release the said documents which had already been registered by him to the respective purchasers in the interest of the parties. The petitioner further states that a Protest Petition which was registered as Doc.No.29 of 2013 dated 29.07.2013 was submitted to the first respondent in respect of the Sale Deeds dated 10.07.2013 to 12.07.2013 which are forged. Since, the said protest petition was not considered by the first respondent, the petitioner has come forward with the present Writ Petition.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

9.It is evident from Section 22~A of the Registration Act that no plot, which is within an unapproved layout could be registered and the registration authority is barred from registering the same. Further, it has been fairly conceded by the learned Additional Government Pleader that registration of plots in unapproved layouts is barred under Section 22~A of the Registration Act.