KATHIRAVAN Vs. DISTRICT REGISTRAR (ADMINISTRATION)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner had presented a sale deed executed on 10/11/2025 by Venkatesan, Nanthagopal, Uma and Sundarrajan in favour of the petitioner for registration. The said request was rejected under the impugned refusal check slip.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned refusal check slip refers to document nos.10935/2025, 11044/2025, 11045/2025 and 11046/2025. By referring to the said documents, he submits that these are settlement deeds in favour of the petitioner's vendors. Without appreciating these aspects, he contends that refusal check slip was issued.

(3.) Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader, accepts notice for both the respondents. By referring to Rule 27 of the Tamil Nadu Registration Rules, 1949, learned counsel submits that only a refusal check slip has been issued and that a speaking order under Sec. 71 of the Registration Act, 1908 (the Registration Act) has not been issued. Therefore, he submits that the petitioner may respond to the refusal check slip so as to enable a speaking order to be issued.