Allowed

Peddada Mangaraju, S/o.Late P.Venkata Ramana, v. .The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC8 Dec 2022WP/37529/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed this writ petition seeking to declare the unilateral cancellation and registration of a gift deed by the 3rd Respondent illegal and void, and to annul the cancellation deed, holding that such unilateral action is contrary to the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Thota Ganga Laxmi's case, which mandates cancellation via a civil suit. The court quashed the registrat

What did the court decide?

The cancellation deed Doc.No.1125/2012 dated 05.05.2012 and the endorsement of the 3rd Respondent were annulled; the petition was allowed.

Peddada Mangaraju, S/o.Late P.Venkata Ramana, Vs… — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.37529 of 2015

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the

¶4

Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

¶5

“….to issue an order direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 3^rd Respondent in registering the Cancelation of Gift Settlement Deed unilaterally, vide Doc.No.1125/2012 dated 05.05.2012 and canceling the Gift Deed vide Doc.No.1483/2001 dated 04.07.2001 as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and unconstitutional and consequently annul the cancellation deed Doc.No.1125/2012 dated 05.05.2012 and the endorsement of the 3^rd Respondent and pass such other order or orders….”

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the lis in this Writ petition is squarely covered by the Judgment reported in Haji Mohammed Ahmed Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others¹ and Fazalullah Khan V. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its District Registrar and others² .

¶7

1 2012(2) ALD 230

¶8

2 2012(2) ALT 728

¶9

¶10

In Haji Mohammed Ahmed Vs. State of

¶11

Andhra Pradesh and others(Supra) , learned Single Judge of this Court held as follows:

¶12

“The Supreme Court, in Thota Ganga Laxmi V. Government of A.P.(1), held that if any sale deed is required to be cancelled, the only remedy is by way of a civil suit for cancellation, but no cancellation deed can be unilaterally executed or registered. The Supreme Court, after referring to Rule 26(i)(k) of the Registration Rules, held that it is only when the earlier sale deed is cancelled by a competent court can a cancellation deed be registered that too after notice to the concerned parties; and unilateral cancellation of the sale deed as well as registration thereof, were wholly void, non-est and meaningless. The observation of the Supreme Court, aforementioned, made in the context of sale deeds would equally apply to unilateral cancellation of gift deeds also. Unilateral cancellation of the gift deed in the present case must there be and is declared to be void. It is made clear that this Order will not preclude the respondent from invoking the jurisdiction of the competent Civil Court for cancellation of the subject gift deed”.

¶13

In view of the same, this Writ Petition is allowed. However, this Order will not preclude the unofficial respondent from invoking the jurisdiction of the competent Civil Court for cancellation of the deed vide document No.1125/2012 dated 05.05.2012. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶14

¶15

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stands closed.

¶16

_______________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date : 08.12.2022 KGR

¶17

¶18

191

¶19

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶20

WRIT PETITION No.37529 of 2015