Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4.The petitioner further submits that the registration of the unapproved plots by the 3rd respondent is against the public policy under the Registration Act. The 11th respondent had sold one of the plot bearing Plot No.22 in the said layout to the respondents 12 & 13 vide registered Sale Deed Doc.No.2504 of 2013 dated 10.07.2013. Likewise the 11th 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 3rd 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 3rd respondent in respect of the Sale Deeds dated 10.07.2013 to 12.07.2013 which are forged. Since, the said protest petition https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis was not considered by the 3rd respondent, the petitioner has come forward with the present Writ Petition.

8.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the materials available on record.

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.