Case Note & Summary
The case arose from a property dispute where the appellant claimed title based on inheritance. The District Registrar, Tenkasi, acting on a complaint, declared the appellant's document as fraudulent and recommended criminal prosecution by order dated 30.05.2022 (also referred to as 30.01.2022). Aggrieved, the appellant filed an appeal before the Deputy Inspector General of Registration, which was pending. However, relying on a previous single judge judgment in another case, the appellant formed an opinion that the Deputy Inspector General lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Consequently, he filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court, challenging the same order of the District Registrar. The learned Single Judge, by order dated 18.11.2024 in W.P.(MD) No.27447 of 2024, held that parallel proceedings—one before the appellate authority and another under Article 226—are impermissible. The Single Judge directed the Deputy Inspector General to dispose of the pending appeal on merits within twelve weeks after hearing the petitioner, and dismissed the writ petition. The appellant then preferred the present writ appeal. The Division Bench, after hearing counsel for the appellant and the Additional Government Pleader for the first respondent, observed that the appellant's approach constituted forum shopping. The court emphasized that a litigant cannot pursue two remedies simultaneously based on presumptions about the appellate authority's jurisdiction. The bench confirmed the Single Judge's order, noting that the appellant should have awaited the decision of the appellate authority before seeking judicial review. The writ appeal was dismissed with no costs, and the appellant was granted liberty to challenge the eventual order of the Deputy Inspector General in accordance with law if aggrieved.
Headnote
A) Writ Jurisdiction - Maintainability - Alternative Remedy - Constitution of India, Article 226 - Appellant filed appeal before Deputy Inspector General of Registration against District Registrar's order declaring document fraudulent, but simultaneously filed writ petition challenging same order, relying on a judgment that the appellate authority lacked power. Court held that parallel proceedings before appellate authority and High Court amount to forum shopping and cannot be entertained. Directed that appeal be decided on merits, and appellant may challenge that order later (Paras 3-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable when an appeal against the same order is pending before the statutory appellate authority; and whether simultaneous pursuit of two remedies amounts to forum shopping.
Final Decision
Writ Appeal dismissed; Single Judge's order confirmed; Appellant permitted to challenge the appellate authority's eventual order in accordance with law.
Law Points
- No parallel proceedings
- forum shopping
- alternative remedy
- exhaustion of statutory appeal
