P ARJUNAN Vs. SUB REGISTRAR JOINT III

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) The petitioner has filed the above writ petition, to direct the respondent to register the sale deed dated 10.06.2008, presented for registration with respect to the 21 cents of land out of the larger extent of 1.26 acres in Survey No. 196/5 in Kambarasanpettai Village, Srirangam Taluk, Tiruchirapalli Registration District.

(3.) In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition the petitioner has elaborately narrated as regards the title of the petitioner as to how he is entitled to the property absolutely. According to the petitioner, after paying sale consideration, the petitioner along with the power of attorney holder of the vendor went to the respondent for presenting the sale deed for registration, the respondent though had received the sale deed refused to register the same and he was giving vague reasons and did not issue any written orders. Though a request was made on 12.06.2008 under the Right to Information Act, demanding the reason for non registration, no information was furnished. Thereafter, when the petitioner perused the receipt which was issued for remittance of registration fee, there was an endorsement stating that it has to be verified that whether the land in question belongs to the temple. It is subsequently, the petitioner had made his verification and came to know that Pitchumani Iyengar claiming himself to be the trustee of the temple has informed the respondent orally not to register any sale deed in respect of S. No. 196/5 and other adjoining survey numbers. But however, no documents have been filed by the said person before the respondent to prove his claim. Therefore, learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent is wholly unsustainable.