You may also like...
-
the present Writ Petition, disputed issues exist between the parties. Even the second respondent herein was a party respondent in yet another Writ Petition filed by one Mr.T.Arockia Dass in W.P.No.754 of 2023, wherein this Court passed an order on 10.01.2023. Therefore, the dispute between the parties cannot be resolved by way of summary proceedings under Section 77A of the Act. Normally, amendments under the Statutes are intended for prospective effect, unless retrospective effect has been expressly made under the amendment. Presumptive retrospective implementation of the amendments in the Statutes would cause larger repercussion and would result in disastrous consequences. Lakhs and lakhs of documents registered prior to the amendments will be placed for adjudication before the Registrar to cancel those documents on personal or on varieties of reasons. Therefore, in the absence of any specific provision to implement the amendment retrospectively, the power conferred through amendment is to be exercised with prospective effect with reference to the documents registered subsequent to the amendment and insertion of Sections 22A, 22B and 77A of the Act. Thus, the petitioner as well as the complainant in the present case have to redress their respective grievances before the competent Civil Court of law. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the impugned order dated 15.07.2022 passed by the first respondent is quashed. Consequently, the parties are at liberty to workout their remedies before the competent Civil Court of law in the manner contemplated. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is also closed. 25.07.2023 Index:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes Speaking order hvk To The District Registrar, South Chennai, Fanepet, Nandhanam, Chennai – 35. S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. hvk W.P.No.19239 of 2023 25.07.2023
by Sekar Reporter · Published August 19, 2023
-
நிவாரணப் பணியில்* ஜனநாயக வழக்கறிஞர் சங்கம். *(DAA)
by Sekar Reporter · Published April 9, 2020
-
6.Prima facie, this Court considers that the G.O., does not appear to have taken into account Schedule II of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 in framing the G.O. 7.The Government is required to spend some time as to the correctness of the G.O., in the light of what the personal law of the country provides in this regard, and required to tweet in the said G.O., dated 29.09.2022. For the present, the respondent is directed to dispose of the petitioner’s N.SESHASAYEE, J. Anu representation dated 22.05.2023 within a period of eight (8) weeks from today. 8.This writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No Costs. 10.07.2023 Anu Index : Yes / No Neutral citation : yes/no To The Tahsildar, No.3, Perambur High Road, Perambur, Chennai-600 011 (Near Perambur Railway Station) W.P.No.20189 of 2023
by Sekar Reporter · Published July 29, 2023