1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:31.03.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN WP(MD)No.2852 of 2011 T.Karnan :Petitioner -Vs- 1.The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chepauk, Chennai - 2. 2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, West Veli Street, Near Reagal Theatre, Madurai. 3.The Sub-Registrar, Registrar Office, Mahal, Madurai - 625 001. :Respondents Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to register the sale deed of the petitioner and handover the document to the petitioner bearing No.P.194/2006 for housing plot in an extent of 60 cents comprised in Old Survey No.154/3 and Re-Survey No.154/25 situated at Thanakkankulam Village, Madurai South Taluk, Madurai District. For petitioner : M/s.R.R.Kannan For respondent : Mr.K.Balasubramanian Additional Government Pleader ORDER This petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the third respondent to register the sale deed of the petitioner and handover the document bearing No.P.194/2006 for housing plot in an extent of 60 cents comprised in Old Survey No.154/3 and Re-Survey No.154/25 situated at Thanakkankulam Village, Madurai South Taluk, Madurai District, to him. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner has purchased the property by virtue of a sale deed dated 06.12.2006 and registered the same as document No.P.194/2006. According to the petitioner, the said document has not been released so far. Though the petitioner approached the third respondent several times from January 2007, they have not released the document so far. Then, orally the third respondent has informed that there is a stay order in force with regard to the property mentioned in the sale deed, whereas no stay order is given to the petitioner nor he was informed by writing about the pendency of the case or interim order. To the knowledge of the petitioner, there is no case pending against the vendor. In any view of the matter, he would state that he https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 has made a representation on 05.02.2011 to release the document. In fact, the second respondent also by his proceedings, dated 14.02.2011, has directed the third respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and in spite of the same, the third respondent so far has not considered the representation nor sent any reply nor returned the document. Hence, the writ petition. 3.On instructions, the learned Additional Government Pleader would contend that there is an injunction order pending. He would further contend that the respondent would pass orders on the representation and give a copy of such order within a period of three weeks. 4.Taking into consideration the submissions made by both parties, it would suffice to direct the third respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 05.02.2011 and pass orders in respect of releasing of property, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is disposed of as per the above terms. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (P&A) / TRUE COPY / Sub Assistant Registrar To: 1.The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chepauk, Chennai - 2. 2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, West Veli Street, Near Reagal Theatre, Madurai. 3.The Sub-Registrar, Registrar Office, Mahal, Madurai - 625 001. +1CC to Mr.R.R.Kannan, Advocate. SR.No.12220. Srm RP/08.04.2011/2P/5C. Order made in W.P.(MD)No.2852 of 2011 31.03.2011. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/