Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

S Parimala And Others vs Inspector General Of Registration And Others

Madras High Court|03 April, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 03.04.2017 CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY Writ Petition No.5361 of 2017 1.S. Parimala 2.S. Karthick 3.S. Nandhini ... Petitioners v.
1. Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai – 600 004.
2. District Registrar(Administration) of South Chennai(in the cadre of Assistant I.G of Registration) Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001.
3. The Sub-Registrar, Velachery, Chennai – 42.
4. Vasuki
5. Bhuvaneswari ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of mandamus, directing the third respondent to take proceedings under section 82 and 83 of the Indian Registration Act and also as per the Order of the Second Respondent in Order No.1481/A3/2015, dated 20.06.2016 within a reasonable time that may be stipulated by this Honourable Court in the interest of Justice to cancel the fraudulent Document No.4718/2012 on the file of SRO, Velachery.
For Petitioners : Mr.V.Raghupathi For Respondents : Mr.A.N.Thambidurai, Special Government Pleader.
O R D E R
The Petitioners have filed the above writ petition to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3rd respondent to take proceedings under sections 82 and 83 of the Indian Registration Act and also as per the order of the 2nd respondent dated 20.06.2016, within a reasonable time to cancel the document No.4718/2012 on the file of SRO, Velachery.
2. It is brought to the notice of this court by the learned counsel for the petitioner that by order dated 20.06.2016 the 2nd respondent found that the Document No.4718/2012 on the file of SRO Velachery is a forged document and also directed the 3rd respondent to initiate proceedings under sections 82 and 83 of the Indian Registration Act.
3. Though this order was passed by the 2nd respondent on 20.06.2016, the 3rd respondent has not taken any action as directed by the 2nd respondent sofar.
4. In these circumstances, I direct the 3rd respondent to comply with the directions of the 2nd respondent dated 20.06.2016 and pass orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
03.04.2017 Index : Yes/No Rj To
1. Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai – 600 004.
2. District Registrar(Administration) of South Chennai(in the cadre of Assistant I.G of Registration) Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001.
3. The Sub-Registrar, Velachery, Chennai – 42.
M.DURAISWAMY, J.
Rj W.P.No.5361 of 2017 03.04.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

S Parimala And Others vs Inspector General Of Registration And Others

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
03 April, 2017
Judges
  • M Duraiswamy