W.P. No. 26960 of 2026 Mahesh Kannan v. The Sub Registrar & Ors. Madras High Court | Order dated 06.08.2026 The petitioner, Mr. Mahesh Kannan, is establishing a Karyalaya at Coimbatore for the Hindu Munnani/RSS office. The present proceedings were significant in facilitating the registration of the property document connected with the establishment of the Karyalaya. The petitioner approached the Hon’ble Madras High Court seeking registration of his sale deed, which had been refused by the Sub-Registrar by invoking Section 22-B of the Registration Act, 1908. The principal issue before the Court was whether Section 22-B created an embargo on registration of the petitioner’s sale deed, particularly in view of the attachment proceedings concerning the subject property. Dr. B. Ramaswamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department (R-11), filed a counter and submitted that the Income Tax Department had a statutory claim over the subject property. He further contended that the private respondents were making bogus claims and requested the Court to take appropriate action. The Hon’ble Court examined Section

[08/08, 11:08] sekarreporter1: http://youtube.com/post/UgkxrCPBWW54XMhDiOldQ4FjxzD847qgk4qn?si=mE0qH3uIjR-zBmOv
[08/08, 11:08] sekarreporter1: Brief Note – W.P. No. 26960 of 2026
Mahesh Kannan v. The Sub Registrar & Ors.
Madras High Court | Order dated 06.08.2026
The petitioner, Mr. Mahesh Kannan, is establishing a Karyalaya at Coimbatore for the Hindu Munnani/RSS office. The present proceedings were significant in facilitating the registration of the property document connected with the establishment of the Karyalaya.
The petitioner approached the Hon’ble Madras High Court seeking registration of his sale deed, which had been refused by the Sub-Registrar by invoking Section 22-B of the Registration Act, 1908.
The principal issue before the Court was whether Section 22-B created an embargo on registration of the petitioner’s sale deed, particularly in view of the attachment proceedings concerning the subject property.
Dr. B. Ramaswamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department (R-11), filed a counter and submitted that the Income Tax Department had a statutory claim over the subject property. He further contended that the private respondents were making bogus claims and requested the Court to take appropriate action.
The Hon’ble Court examined Section 22-B of the Registration Act and held that its clauses are inter-linked and have to be read conjointly. The Court observed that the provision is intended to prevent registration of forged documents or documents prohibited by law.
On consideration of the arguments and merits of the matter, the Hon’ble Court formed a prima facie view that there was no embargo under Section 22B preventing registration of the petitioner’s sale deed and directed the SubRegistrar to register the sale deed forthwith upon representation, subject to the final outcome of the writ petition.
Role of Dr. B. Ramaswamy
Dr. B. Ramaswamy, Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department, played a significant role in placing the Department’s statutory claim before the Hon’ble Court. He filed the Department’s counter, specifically asserted the statutory interest of the Income Tax Department in the subject property, and brought to the Court’s notice the alleged bogus claims of the private respondents.
Significance of the Matter
The matter is significant as it concerns the establishment of a Karyalaya at Coimbatore for the Hindu Munnani/RSS office. The petition, on the basis of the arguments advanced and the merits of the case, resulted in the Hon’ble Court directing the Sub-Registrar to register the document forthwith. The order is therefore an important development in facilitating the establishment of the proposed Karyalaya and the activities intended to be carried out from the premises.
Appearances
Mr. J. Kumaran – Counsel for the Petitioner
Dr. B. Ramaswamy – Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax
Department (R-11)