Senthilkumar v. The Sub Registrar, Thuraiyur, Trichy District.2.The Executive Officer, Prasanna Venkatachalapathy Temple, Perumal

But no enquiry was conducted. On this sole ground and the ground that the directions given by the Hon'ble Division Bench in the decision reported in 2017 (3) CTC 135 (Sudha Ravi Kumar Vs. The Special Commissioner & Commissioner, H.R & C.E. Department, Chennai) was not followed, the impugned refusal check slip is quashed. The petitioner is permitted to re-present the document. The registering shall adhere to the directions that are laid down by the Hon'ble Division Bench, which are as follows:-“(i) The registering authority before whom the document has been presented shall cause service of notice on the parties to the deeds and also to the objector / religious institution, hold summary enquiry, hear the parties and then either register or refuse to register the document by passing an order having regard to the relevant facts as indicated above.2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.24790 of 2025(ii) If the registering authority, refuses to register any document by accepting the objections raised under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, the aggrieved may file a statutory appeal under the Act.

(iii) If the objections raised under Section 22-A of the Act by the religious institution are rejected and the document is registered, the remedy for the religious institution is to either approach this Court by way of a writ petition seeking cancellation of the registration or for any other relief or to approach the civil Court for declaration of the title and for other consequential reliefs. (iv) If the registering authority refuses to register the document acting on the objections raised by a religious institution under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, the parties to the deed will be at liberty to straightaway approach the Civil Court for declaration of title and other relief without availing the opportunity for filing a statutory appeal. (v) We further direct that if the deed has already been registered without there being any objection by the religious institution under Section 22-A of the Act, the document shall be returned to the parties concerned leaving it open for the religious institution to approach either the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or the Civil Court for appropriate relief as indicated above. At any rate, the registering authority shall not withhold the deed which has already been registered.” 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.24790 of 2025 The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of re-submission of the document.