Judgment · High Court

W.P.No.19508 of 2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 10.01.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHAW.P.No.19508 of 20241.M.Renganayaki2.R.Savithiri3.M.Santhi4.C.Dhanalakshmi5.C.Saravanan6.S.Vasanthi7.S.Jothikumar8.S.Nanthini9.Saroja...PetitionersVs1.The Joint Sub-Registrar, Namakkal, Namakkal District.1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19508 of 20242.Venkatesh3.Susila4.S.K.Palanivel5.Santhi...Respondents PRAYER :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pleased to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, Calling for the entire records of the impugned order of the 1st respondent in Refusal Number: RFL/1, Joint Sub-Registrar, Namakkal 77/2023 dated 01.12.2023, quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to register the partition deed. For Petitioners: M/s.V.C.Janarthanan for Mr.P.S.KothandaramFor Respondents: M/s.P.Harish Government Advocate (For R1 )ORDERThe Writ Petition has been filed for the following relief:- Calling for the entire records of the impugned order of the 1st respondent in Refusal Number: RFL/1, Joint Sub-Registrar, Namakkal 77/2023 dated 01.12.2023, quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to register the partition deed.2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19508 of 20242.The petitioners would submit that the property which is the subject matter of the partition deed belong exclusively to them, though a suit for partition has been filed by the respondents 2 to 5 herein.

The learned counsel would submit that the properties in question originally belonged to one Chinnusamy who had executed a Will in favour of his son Ramasamy in the year 1920. Petitioners would further submit that the identity as well as the right of the respondents to claim a partition is already the subject matter of challenge in the suit for partition filed by the private parties. 3. Be that as it may. It is his contention that the document can be registered subject to the ultimate result of the suit for partition. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the private parties would submit that there is a serious dispute with reference to title and the matter is already before the Civil Court and the petitioners can await the registration of any document till such time as a finality is arrived at in the suit for partition. Therefore, he would support the refusal check slip issued by the first respondent.

3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19508 of 20244.Heard Mr.V.C.Janarthanan, the learned counsel for Mr.P.S.Kothandaram, the learned counsel for petitioner and Mr.P.Harish, the learned Government Advocate for R1. 5. The petitioners would contend that the property belongs to them exclusively by virtue of a Will that has been executed by their grand father in the year 1920 and this document has also been annexed to the partition deed. That apart the patta in respect of the property stands in the name of the petitioners and they have also been dealing with the property in question exercising their right as owners. That apart, even the compensation for acquisition of the property has also been paid only to the petitioner which would go to show that the petitioners are in possession of the property. The document that is sought to be registered is a partition deed which is executed between the petitioner's herein.