SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR Writ Petition No.747 of 2023 and WMP.No.702 of 2023 Murugan

by ·

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :10.01.2023

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR

Writ Petition No.747 of 2023 and WMP.No.702 of 2023

  1. Murugan
  2. Sethumaniammal …  Petitioners

-Vs-

  1. The District Registrar (Administration), Office of the District Registrar,
  2. The Joint Sub-Registrar – II,

Kallakurichi.   … Respondents

Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 30.12.2022 in Na.Ka.No.6335/A1/2022 and quash the same.

For Petitioners   : Mr.K.Selvaraj

For Respondents       : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan

Special Government Pleader

 ORDER 

The prayer sought for herein is for a writ of Certiorari to quash the impugned proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 30.12.2022 in

Na.Ka.No.6335/A1/2022

 

  1. It seems that a complaint has been given by a third party against the petitioner with regard to the documents in question, which according to the complainant is a fraudulent or bogus document. Therefore, in order to cancel the documents, such complaint was given to the first respondent to enquire the matter and decide the same within the meaning of Section 77-A of the Registration Act, 1908.
  2. Having receipt of the complaint, the first respondent has issued a summon on 30.12.2022 to the petitioner asking him to appear before the first respondent on 05.01.2023 with necessary documents to take defense against the said complaint.
  3. In this context, the petitioner’s case is that, though on the saiddate, i.e. on 05.01.2023, the petitioner appeared before the first respondent and had given a request in writing to get the copy of the complaint given against the petitioner or if any documents filed by the complainant to substantiate that the document in question is a fraudulent document, such a document including the copy of the complaint has not been furnished to the petitioner, without which, if the first respondent proceed to complete the enquiry and pass any orders against the document in question, then, it would be a case of without furnishing the necessary documents and thereby, if any adverse orders is passed, that would greatly prejudice the interest of the petitioner. Therefore, only at that juncture, the petitioner has moved the present writ petition challenging the very same summon issued by the first respondent dated 30.12.2022.
  4. Reiterating the aforesaid, Mr.K.Selvaraj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has made submissions.
  5. However, Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that, if at all it is a grievance of the petitioner, that he needs a copy of the complaint and the documents filed by the complainant against the petitioner to substantiate the allegations made against the petitioner as if that the document is a fraudulent document, those documents certainly would be furnished to the petitioner and based on which, let him make his reply and co-operate with the first respondent for completing the enquiry at the earliest point of time, he contended.
  6. Considering the said submissions made by learned counsel appearing for both sides and taking note of the said stand taken by the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, this Court feels that, a direction can be given to the first respondent to furnish the document available with the first respondent presented by the complainant against the petitioner and after receipt of the same, the petitioner can give his reply to complete the enquiry.
  7. In that view of the matter, this Court is inclined to dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:

 That there shall be a direction to the first respondent to furnish the copy of the complaint given against the petitioner along with any other documents filed by the complainant against the petitioner to substantiate their stand that the document in question is a fraudulent or bogus document and on furnishing the same, it is open to the petitioner to take his defense to file a detailed reply within a period of two weeks thereafter and after receiving such reply or after lapse of two weeks’ period as indicated above, it is open to the first respondent to proceed with the enquiry and complete the same and pass necessary orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of six weeks thereafter.

With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

10.01.2023

Index : Yes/No

Speaking order: Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No

mp

Note: Issue order copy on 12.01.2023

  1. SURESH KUMAR, J.

mp

To

  1. The District Registrar (Administration), Office of the District Registrar,
  2. The Joint Sub-Registrar – II,

Writ Petition No.747 of 2023

10.01.2023

You may also like...