P.Azeethu v. The Inspector General of Registration Door No.100
Case at a glance
- Bench
- D BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 44.G.Vasanthi ...RespondentsWrit Petitions are filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent to consdier the petitioner's protest petition dated 09.02.2026 and representation dated 09.02.2026 within a time frame that may be stipulated by…
Judgment
W.P(MD)No.8192 of 2026BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 27.03.2026 CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHYW.P(MD)No.8192 of 2026P.Azeethu... PetitionerVs.
The Inspector General of Registration Door No.100, Santhome High Road, Foreshore Estate, Pattinapakkam, Chennai-6000282.The District Registrar Madurai South Madurai.
The Sub Registrar, Peraiyur, Madurai District.
Operative part
G.Vasanthi ...RespondentsWrit Petitions are filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent to consdier the petitioner's protest petition dated 09.02.2026 and representation dated 09.02.2026 within a time frame that may be stipulated by this CourtFor Petitioner :Mr.J.BarathanFor R1 to R3:Mrs.K.Malathi Additional Government Pleader1 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.8192 of 2026ORDERThis writ petition is filed for a direction to the third respondent to consider the protest petition by the petitioner dated 09.02.2026 and the representation dated 09.02.2026. 2. The case of the petitioner is that, the petitioner is the owner of the property and the third parties are further attempting to alienate the property. It can be seen that asserting title as against the said parties already the petitioner has filed a suit in O.S.No.224 of 2024 on the file of the Sixth Additional District Court Madurai. 3. Therefore, if the petitioner does not want the said defendants to further alienate, it is for the petitioner to move such interlocutory application in the same suit. As far as the protest petition is concerned, if any document is presented at the time of considering the registration, protest petition/objection will duly be taken into account in the manner known to law. 4. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations. No costs.27.03.20262 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.8192 of 2026NCC:Yes/NoTo1.The Inspector General of Registration Door No.100, Santhome High Road, Foreshore Estate, Pattinapakkam, Chennai-6000282.The District Registrar Madurai South Madurai. 3. The Sub Registrar, Peraiyur, Madurai District.3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.8192 of 2026D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.NsW.P(MD)No.8192 of 202627.03.20264
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.