K VELMURUGAN Vs. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, challenging the proceedings of the first respondent, dated 30.8.2010, and to direct the fourth respondent to register the sale deed of the petitioner, dated 18.8.2010, relating to the property bearing Plot No.155, in Thirumalai Nagar, Annexe III Layout, measuring an extent of 1200 sq.ft, in S.Nos.489/7, 510/B, 510/6 and 510/7B, situate at No.5, Morai Village, Ambattur Taluk, Tiruvallur District, and to release the said document after registration.

(2.) IT has been stated that the property in question is a vacant site, having an extent of 1200 sq.ft, forming a part of a vast extent of lands in Morai Villai, Ambattur Taluk, Tiruvallur District, which had, originally, belonged to the ancestors of one Chenchu Raja. The legal heirs of the said Chenchu Raja, had been in joint possession and enjoyment of the lands, in S.Nos.489/7, 510/5B, 510/6 and 510/7B, in Morai Village. The title in respect of the properties in question are traceable, from the records available, to the ancestors of Chenchu Raja, who were the shrotriyundars, in respect of the properties in Morai village. An inam settlement had been issued by the Inam Commissioner, on 17.5.1865. During the second world war, the Indian Military troops had occupied the entire village forcing the residents and those who were the owners of the properties to flee the village. However the title of the property in which the petitioner had purchased the land in question, by way of a sale deed, dated 18.8.2010, from the legal heirs of Chenchu Raja, is not in dispute.

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the impugned proceedings of the first respondent, dated 30.8.2010, is arbitrary, illegal and void. He had also submitted that the refusal of the fourth respondent to admit the sale deed, dated 18.8.2010, for registration, is against the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and the principles of natural justice. He had also submitted that there is no law empowering, either the first and the fourth respondents to insist that the parties to the sale deed should get a `No Objection Certificate' from the second and the third respondents. THE fourth respondent is under an obligation to receive the document in question, to register it and to return the same to the parties concerned. THErefore, the impugned proceedings passed by the first respondent, on 30.8.2010, refusing to accept the sale deed, dated 18.8.2010, is illegal and void.