(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st Respondent herein to remove the unwarranted entry in the Book1, related to the 2nd Respondent Department as far as the subject the property under Survey Nos. 2/11D, 2/11E to an extent of 2732 ½ square feet situated at Managiri 1st Bit, K.K.Nagar Main Road, Madurai District and to alter the Encumbrance of the subject property as free hold property.)

A.D. Jagadish Chandira, J.

1. The prayer in this writ petition is to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st Respondent herein to remove the unwarranted entry in the Book-1, related to the 2nd respondent Department as far as the subject the property under Survey Nos.2/11D, 2/11E to an extent of 2732 ½ square feet situated at Managiri 1st Bit, K.K.Nagar Main Road, Madurai District and to alter the Encumbrance of the subject property as free hold property.

2. Submissions of the counsel for the petitioner:

The subject property under Survey Nos.2/11D, 2/11E to an extent of 2732 ½ square feet situated at Managiri 1st Bit, K.K.Nagar Main Road, Madurai District, was acquired by the petitioner herein from the 3rd respondent through sale deed dated 23.11.2018 which was registered as Document No.5098/2018 on the file of the SRO, Thallakulam, Madurai. The said property was purchased only after due inspections of the revenue records and by paying adequate sale consideration. Finding that the title of the property is very clear, the petitioner herein had invested his hard earned savings on the said property and has also improved the value of the property. Whileso, the petitioner had decided to mortgage the property and when he had verified the encumbrance of the said property, he came to know that there is an adverse entry pursuant to the proceedings of the first respondent under F.No.ECIR/CEZO/Z-11/03/2019 dated ... August, 2020 due to which the petitioner is prevented from dealing with the property.

3. For better appreciation, the said adverse entry is extracted here under:

                  

                  

4. It is the further case of the petitioner that neither the petitioner nor the 3rd respondent, who is the vendor of the property were subjected to any order of provisional attachment or any order of physical attachment from the first respondent herein and alleging that the entry causes grave hardship, the petitioner has come up before this Court seeking to remove the encumbrance entry in the SRO's Office Book-1, at page 153, Sl.No.18 dated 04.09.2020.

5. Notice was ordered to the respondents. Mr.K.R.Laxman, learned counsel for the first respondent would submit that as of today, there is no provisional attachment under Section 5 of the PMLA Act, 2002, in respect of the subject property. However, he would submit that the first respondent sent a communication to the second respondent seeking to provide certified copies of the sale deed and other related documents of the properties mentioned in Annexure 10 and they have not sought for any attachment of the property. However, during such period, the first respondent had requested the registration not to entertain any transfer and also to provide the current state of the sale deed. He would submit that no further action has been taken in respect of the property and the first respondent is not taking any steps to attach the property and is not proceeding any further in respect of the subject property.

6. Mr.S.Vasik Ali, learned Counsel for the State of Tamilnadu appearing for the second respondent has filed a counter. He would submit that only based on the communication sent by the first respondent in F.No.ECIR/CEZO/Z-11/03/2019 dated ... August, 2020, such an entry has been made in Book-1. However, he would further submit that as per the procedure, that entry cannot be removed and as per the procedure, the remarks to the effect that the property is not subject to any attachment can be entered in Book-1 in respect of the subject property.

7. Heard the learned counsel appearing on both side.

8. As submitted by the learned counsel for the first respondent, as of today, the property is not subjected to any attachment. In such circumstances, the entry made in Book-1 will definitely cause hardship to the petitioner who is the owner of the property having purchased the property through his hard earned money.

9. In view of the submissions made, a direction is issued to the second respondent to enter appropriate remarks in Book-1 relating to the property, stating that the property is not subjected to any attachment. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

10. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of.