JOTHI Vs. JOINT SUB-REGISTRAR, DISTRICT REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second respondent is the husband of the petitioner. Earlier, the second respondent executed a Settlement Deed dated 16.07.2004 in favour of the petitioner, who is the wife. Later on, the said Settlement Deed was unilaterally cancelled by the second respondent vide Cancellation of Settlement Deed dated 28.05.2009, which was registered as Document No.2188 of 2009 on the file of the first respondent. Now, the petitioner has sought to quash the said Cancellation of Settlement Deed.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the unilateral cancellation of Settlement Deed dated 28.05.2009, by the second respondent, registered as Document No.2188 of 2009 on the file of the first respondent, is opposed to the Full Bench decision of this Court in Latif Estate Line India Ltd., v. Hadeeja Ammal (FB) reported in 2011 (2) CTC 1 and hence, it has to be quashed.

(3.) IT is not disputed by the learned counsel for the second respondent that unilateral Cancellation of Settlement Deed is bad as has been held by the Full Bench of this Court in the judgment referred to above. Further, according to the learned counsel for the second respondent, the second respondent has filed a suit seeking for declaration that the Settlement Deed dated 16.07.2004 executed in favour of the petitioner, is sham and nominal.