Allowed

Gajjela Venkateshwarlu v. The State of Telangana And 5 Others

Telangana HC21 Feb 2023WP/35728/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition filed challenging the unilateral registration of a cancellation deed by the Sub-Registrar without the counterpart party's signature. The Court quashed the registration violating statutory rules and directed amendments.

What did the court decide?

Cancellation deed document No. 20533 dated 04.06.2022 quashed; Third respondent directed to carry out necessary amendments in record within 4 weeks.

Gajjela Venkateshwarlu Vs The State of Telangana And 5… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2023)

t^3256I

i, lr T

x & *

¶6

I' { I 'rli rrl

¶7

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶8

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶9

PRESENT

¶10

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

¶11

WRIT PETITION NO:35728 oF 2022

¶12

Between:

¶13

Gajjela Venkateshwarru, . s/o. Mr. G. Krishna, Aged about 37 vears. occupation.^private Emptoyee, Ryo n. rrro.sli')Ezt, "pr"t rviiEzrl,B_6i#i: Narendra Nagar Cotony, Amleenpur, srngri"ddy 6isdid, Teta;g;;;. ' -."",.,

¶14

...PETITIONER

¶15

AND

¶16

The State of Telanoana rep by its principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat. HvderibaO.'

¶17

The Commissioner and lnspector General of Registration and Stamps, Telangana State.

¶18

The Sub-Registrar, Sanga Reddy, Sanga Reddv Dist. 4. M/s Sarara Kumari NailSn.chatiivarttr-G,'vwol tlie ventatacharv Naflan cha kravartura. Aoed ahout. oz yea ri, oci. i-i;"ilid, ci;.'5_"i _Erir)ii6ia Hydero uda X roaE. Jana priya Utopian Ap; ;: i;;ili;;a' R;E j;;"r"d;;". "' Attapur, Hyderabad - SOb048.

¶19

Sri N. C. L. Naravanacharyulu @ Lakshminarayana Charyulu Nallan cla.kravarthuta, Slo. Late Ven6t#h;,y N;ll;; 6nLrrrurtrlr, rep. by his GPA hotder Mr. Ramachandra Cfrirvuirl t i;i6; dillr"rartuta, Ased about. 43 Years, occ. Business, .ouo.3_1_siJpt4Cozs, nyoergroa xibad, Jani"oiiva p ;i ir iJ;; 6;; : dddiild",'

¶20

"^{! jlg,gl lpj1, +t v{9 ra bao flqlen o ra n ioar, -Ald} o. Dn Kamacnandra charvuru. Nalan chakravarthura, Sio. t_ate veniitacrrirv Nattan Chakravartuta, Aoed ,bori. 43 V;;;i'6J"]'a'u.,n".s, RIo. 3_.1 fl;'jg"'jl,'"?r:f f ['#',1"T-,;".XLJ:rli'ir'.t1ffi^{lbart'r-rvoeraoio}

¶21

...RESPONDENTS

¶22

Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS decraring the action of 3rd respondent in unirateraly registering the Deed of cancerration vide document No 20533 dated 04ro6t2022 presented by the respondents 4 to 6 for canceflation of sare deed document No.23144 of 2021 dated 26106/2021 executed by the respondents 4 to 6 in favour as iflegar, arbitrary,

¶23

high handed, unjusl rrnreasonable and violative of pr ncrp es of lrlatural Justice, Fair Play and Er uity, besides, being infringement of Furdamental and Constitutional Riglht ; guaranteed under Article 14, 19, ll.l , anc 300-A of the constitution ol lnciz zrnd consequently direct the 3rd respcnJen: to cancel the Deed of cancellalior Vide document No. 20533 dated 04icr6, ill)22 and delete the same from the recor s

¶24

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶25

Petition uncer Section 151 cPC praying that in the crrcrrnst;rnces stated in the affidavit filed in s lpport of the petition, the High Court may tte pleased to direct the respondents 4 tc 6 not alienate or create third party rightr; n respect of open Plot No. 100, A-Bl,:c ., in Sy. No. 87 and 9l , admeasuring 20() l:iq. yards or 167.2 Sq. It4eters, situak d at Narendra Nagar, Ameenpur. /\r.lee rpur, lvlandal, Sangareddy Distri,rt l.S. N/PP Ameenpur, Z. p,. IVedak at [i,argareddy pending disposal of the Writ F:tition.

¶26

Counsel for the Pr-,ti ioner: SRI cUMMALA RAMESH REDDy

¶27

Counsel for the Rr:s rondent Nos.1 TO 3: GP FOR STAMpS AND REGISTRATION

¶28

Counsel for the Rr:s rondent Nos.4 TO 6: SRI M.RADHAKRISFINA

¶29

The Court made the bllowing: ORDER

¶30

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO 3572a OF 2022

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

This Writ Petition is hled seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the third respondcnt in unilaterally registering the deed of cancellarion, dated 04.06.2022 vid,e document bearing No.20533 of 2O2l cancelling the previously executed sale deed, dated 26.06.202 I vide document bearing No.23744 of 2021 in respect of the pr.operty bearing plot No. 10O, A-Block admeasuring 2O0 squ:Lre yards situated in Survey Nos.87 and 91 of Narendra Nagar, Ameenpur, Ameenpur Mandal, Sangareddy District.

¶33

A perusal of the material on record shows that the earlier document i.e. sate deed dated 26.06.2021 is shown to have been executed by the respondents 4 and 5 herein in favour of the petitioner herein in respect of the above said propert5r and the said document is a bilateral document. However, the said bilateral document was cancelled by the respondents 5 and 6 herein unilaterally, and the petitioner herein is not a signatory to the said cancellation deed. The registration of such a cancellation deed is in violation of Rulc 26(i)(k) of the Telangana

¶34

MSI(,J Iv.P. t\lo.il 572 8 oF 2022

¶35

¶36

-r

¶37

Rulcs un 1e tht Registratiolr^{Act, 1908. Th,l said Flulc rcadszts} under:

¶38

II-at thc Canccllalion^Dcecl of the^{prcviousl' egt:;tcred} dced of :onvcyancc on salc of immovable^proporty is^{l<,)cu1cd by} both th cxe,ruting and thc claiming^parties thcrcol^{rrnlcss such} Canccll ti,rn Dccd is executed under the ordcrs^{o- i( oml)etent} C()u rt o under Rulc 2'13."

¶39

The said F u.e cast an^obligation on^{Lhe l egis[o]'ing offlcer to} ensure^I h: t ar- thc timc o[^{prcsentation ftlrre rgis ration of} cancellatio r^,1ecds of^{prcviously registeredde<:ds c,f collveyance} beforr' hirr , such cat-rcclla tion^{deeds arecxt:<:utc dlrv all thc} oxecular t alld claimant^{parties to the} l)revl'l^{lsily registert:cl} convevilr)c, Ifrom the^lzrrlguage ol^{Rule, itis :,eaI thaLthe} same is rr rldzrtory. In vicu' of the^{same,frrlrn tl'tc peruszrl of} rmpugncd canccllation deed it is evidr:nt^{tfLrrt lhethird} respondrrn €rcted in violation of the statutory^{Fluleand failed to} dischzrrg,e th e obligation casl on him.^{H ence,t he impugned} deed r>f r:a Lc:llation is not sustainable.undt:r^larv 3. A<:cr rctingly, the impugned deed o[^{t;ztnct:lla1ion dated} 04.06.2O2 ] vicle document^{bearing No.20533 of :2t)21 is hereby} cance lled rr,d the third respondent^{is furlherdi:r:cttrd to carry} out nec,ls ary amendmenLs^{in the approprial-e Ioi:list3rs to that} effect and c,lmplcte^{the samc within a pelio(lo i lbur' (4) weeks} lrom lhr-' c ate of^{receipt of a copy of this orrier.}

¶40

3 MSK,.' w.P.NO.35728 0F 2022

¶41

However, if the respondents 4 to 6 herein are aggrieved by the sale deed dated 26.02.2021 vide document No.23744 of 2021, it is open for them to initiate appropriate proceedings for cancellation of the said document in accordancc with law and in case, any such proceedings are initiated, the same shall be decided on its own merits.

¶42

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed as indicated hereinabove.

¶43

There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellancous applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.

¶44

SD/.MOHD.SANAULLAH^ANSARI ASSISTANT-[TEGISTRAR //rRUE coPY/' ,Ecffii oFFtcER

¶45

'o^{',. tn" PrincipalSecretary, Revenue Department' Secretariat' Hyderabad' State} of Telanqana.Telanqana.

¶46

of Telanqana.Telanqana.

¶47

, iir; ffiHffi;ioner^{andlnspectorGeneralof Registrationand stamps'}

¶48

Telangana^State.

¶49

s ihe sii;-negistrar,^{Sanga Reddy,SangaRed.dy Dist'} ;. d;-cCds"Rl'cLjMrrant-n^{nnrvrtSu {Eoov-Advocate [oP-ucl} -^., i. ifi 6d.'L-G'iFOR^{STAti'li's AN-DREG|STRATION, Hish courtfor the}

¶50

.a*:""%H,3[?if#5H['^t?3ftoniolXuoT"",,"ropuc]

¶51

Two CD^CoPies

PSK SW

HIGH COUR]

DATED:21^rci:|2023

ORDER

WP.No.35728^{of 2022}

¶57

.-'a:
(:..
/
I '2
1 : i\ir:l ?[?3
1e
.t;.

¶58

ALLOWIN 3^{THE WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT^COSTS.

Gajjela Venkateshwarlu v. The State of Telangana And 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gajjela Venkateshwarlu v. The State of Telangana And 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M Sudarshan Goud Vs Prl.Secy., Revenue Hyd., and 4 Others

P. Babu Pears and 5 Ors. Vs Prl. Secy., Rev. Dept. and 3 Ors.

Mir Mujahid Ali Vs The State of Telangana

Aku Rama Devi Vs The State of Telangana and 5 others

Mohd. Ujala Baba Vs The State of Telangana And Another

Pendyala Ravi Kumar Vs The State of Telangana