K.MADHAIYAN Vs. SUB REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this writ petition is to the Refusal Check Slip dtd. 20/10/2022 issued by the respondent refusing to register the sale deed dtd. 20/10/2022 executed by the petitioner in favour of one Nandhini.

(2.) 0. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows:

(3.) A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent Sub Registrar, Palacode inter alia contending that there was a partition in respect of larger extent of land in S.No.558/A between one Erusan, Maathaiyan and Mathaiyan (petitioner herein) and based on such partition, Maathaiyan executed a sale deed for 3924 square fee by creating a passage in S.No.558/1 and that the sale deed was registered as Doc.No.3057/2011. Thereafter, a power of attorney was executed in respect of 40.50 cents by one Erusan and tw others in favour of Pandurangan which was registered as Doc.No.928/2016. Based on such power of attorney, sale deeds were executed in respect of 2339 square feet of land (Doc.No.1306/2016); 1326 square feet (Doc.No.1400/2016); 1289.75 square feet (Doc.No.1435); 1267.5 square feet (Doc.No.1436/2016); and 1326 square feet (Doc.No.1687/2016). Thereafter, Maadaiyan registered a plot measuring an extent of 1309.5 square feet vide Doc.No.1890/2016 . Further, several sale transactions were made by Erusan and two others. A pathway admeasuring 1320 square feet was gifted to the Commissioner, Palacode Panchayat by way of registered Doc.No.25606/2022. After the several sales, now a remaining extent of 4620 square feet is left in the unapproved layout which cannot be sold without proper approval from the District Town Planning Office and Panchayat (Local Body) as per Sec. 22-A (2) of the Registration Act, 1908. The petitioner was advised to get approval from the authorities concerned. The order passed by the respondent refusing to register the sale deed citing the bar contained in Sec. 22-A(2) of the Registration Act cannot be found faulted with.