Disposed

Smt. Avutha Shanthamma v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC6 Feb 2025WP/3365/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sub-Registrar refused registration of a Gift Settlement Deed citing two conflicting family member certificates suggesting possible fraud. The High Court held family member certificates cannot determine legal heir status or registrability, set aside the refusal, and directed parties to obtain a succession certificate from the civil court before seeking registration.

What did the court decide?

Refusal order No.229/2024 dated 26.11.2024 set aside; parties at liberty to seek succession certificate from civil court; registering authority to reconsider accordingly.

Smt. Avutha Shanthamma Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³²⁵⁵ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND ANQ TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 6s oF 2025

¶8

Between:

¶9

Smt. Avutha Shanthamma, Wo Avqtha Bqlp Swamy, Aged about. 66 years, Occ; House wife, R/o.D.No.2.53/1 , Pasupula !illbge, Kodair Mandal, frlagarkwnool District.

¶10

..,..PETITIONER

¶11

ANP

¶12

1 The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Registration^qnd Stamps Department, Secretariat, FydereQad.

¶13

2 The Sub-Registrar, [rlagarkurngol at Nag6rkurnool District.

¶14

I The District Registrar, Registration and $tamps Department, At Mahaboobnagar. [/Thaboobnagar^District.

¶15

Avutha Bha rgavi, claiming to be Wo.A.Papala Rayudu, Age. 32 years, occ Housewife, H.No.2-5311 , Pasupula Vittage, Kodair Mandal, Nagarkurnool District.

¶16

.....RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petitian Under Artiple 226 of the Cqp;litutign of lndia praying that in lhe circumstances stated in the affidavi! filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ,^grder or dirgction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in refusal order No.22912024, dated.26-11-2024 refusing of register the^pending documentⁱⁿ respect of thg^property for being illegal,^grbitrary without any^jurisdiction and pontrary to the provisions of Registration Act, 1908 consequently direct the 2ndRespondent^herein to receive,^{registerand release the} Gift^{Settlement Deed} presented by the petitioner in respect property Plot bearing No.3111 to an extent

¶18

144.4 sq.yds in Sy.No.56/A/tu3, situated at Deshittikyala Village, Nagarkurnool Mandal and District.

¶19

|.A.NO:'l OF 2025

¶20

Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cireumstances stated in the affidavit filed iq suppgrt of the petition, the High Court may be^pleased to direct lfre 2n(^pgEpondpnt hereiq to receiye, register and release the^qift Settlement Qeed gJeselied by the petitioner in respgct^pfpperty Plot bearipq Na.31/1 to gn extqn! of 14!.4 sq^ydg In Sy No.56/A/A,13, sitqeled et DeshittikyalA Village, NagErlrurnqql MenCat and Biqtrict.

¶21

gqunspl for the Petiliongr : SRI B.SRINIVASULU

¶22

9ounsel^for !l-r9^{Rgppondent Nos.1} !o^{3 : AGP FOR REVENUE}

¶23

Ggunsel for the ReQpon{ent No,4 ; -.

¶24

The cqurt gSCe t!9 folleving ORQEE

¶25

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.3365 of 2o25

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

This writ petition has been filed seeking to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in refusal order No.229 /2024 d,ated 26.11.2024 refusing to register the pending document in respect of the propert5r for being illegal, arbitrary without any jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of Registration Act, 1908 and consequently, direct the 2.d respondent herein to ieceive, register and release the Gift Settlement Deed presented by the petitioner in respect of Plot bearing No.31/1 to an extent of L44.4 square yards in Sy.No.56/A/A/3 situated at Deshittikyala Village, Nagarkurnool Mandal & District.

¶29

The brief facts of the case are that tJle petitioner's son Avutha Papal Rayudu purchased plot bearing No.31/1 to an extent of 144.4 square yards in Sy.No.56/A/A/3, situated at Deshittikyala Village, Nagarkurnool Mandal and District (hereinafter referred as 'subject land") on 15.09.2017 from one Smt. D. Manemma vide Sa-le Deed document No. 5985/ 20 1 7 registered at S.R.O. Nagarkurnool. However, petitioner's son died intestate on 24.7O.2O21 due to ill-health leaving petitioner and her husband and two other sons and sisters. Accordingly,^petitioner and their family filed an^{applicationfor}

¶30

)

¶31

issuance of Family Member Certificate, thereupon The Mandal Revenue Officer (Thahsildar), Kodair Mandal issued the Family Member Certihcate ot O8.O2.2022. It is their further case that the 4tr respondent claiming as wife of the deceased son of the petitioner also obtained a Family Member Certificate from the Thahsildar, Kodair on O8.O2.2O24 and basing on the fabricated sale deed is trying to grab the subject land. However, the 2nd respondent after coming to know about the alleged fraud cancelled the document on O3.05.2024. As such to protect the subject plot left over by the deceased, petitioner's family members have decided to execute Gift Settlement peed in favour of petitioner- In this regard, Gift Settlement Deed was presented before 2"d respondent on 03.1O.2024 but the same was refused vide refusal order No.229/2024, dated 26.11.2024, keeping in view the ambiguity with regard to the two family member certificates said to have been issued by the same Thahsildar, Kodair on two different dates. Questioning the said in action of 2,,d respondent to register the subject document, the present writ petition is hled.

¶32

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Sub-Registrar, Nagarkurnool/ Respondent has refused to register the subject document vide Refusal Order No.229 of 2024 dated 26. I 1.2024 with the following reasons, which is extracted as under:

¶33

'The schedule property was purchased by one of the sons of Shantamma by name Avuta Papat Rayudu through Document No.5985/2017 and died later leaving behind the executants and

¶34

¶35

¶36

claimants as per the document and as per the family members certificate issued by the Thahsilda-r of Kodair bearing No. FAMCO222010l dated 08.10.2022. However, a complaint is received at later dated O7.O5.2O24 stating that the said later Avuta Papal Rayudu .has^{living wifeBhargavi, sons Nishanth,SaileshandDaughter} Meenakshi, through another family member certificate issued by the same Thahsilda-r of Kodair bearing document NO.FAMCO224O 14586Os dated 09.O2.2O24.

¶37

This, there appears that the executants have suppressed the family members of Late Avuta Papal Rayudu and excluding them have executed the present settlement deed. As such there appears fraud involved in the execution of the present pending document."

¶38

I-earned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondent No.2 earlier has registered various sale deed documents basing on the family member certificate. But, coming to his case the respondent No.2 has refused to register the subject document mentioning the above reasons in the refusal order dated 26.11.2024. He would further submit that the respondent No.2 passed the impugned refusal order without giving aly opportunity of hearing.

¶39

Heard both sides.

¶40

Prima-facie, the respondent No.2 based on a complaint dated O7.O5.2O24 and on noticing two different family member certilicates issued by Thahsildar, Kodair dated Oa.lO.2O22 ar.d O9.O2.2O24 had taken a view that some sort of fraud might have been committed and

passed refusal order dated 26.11.2024. It is to be noted that family member certificate cannot be used in any Court proceedings for any purpose and that such certificate cannot be basis for deciding the status of the legal heirs. The Sub-Registrar, Nagarkurnool cannot decide the registrability of document basing on the family member certiflcate.

¶45

Having considered the above facts and circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to set aside the refusal order No.229 of 2024 dated 26. ll.2o24 and accordingly refusal order dated 26-11.2024 is hereby set-aside and this writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to petitioner and Respondent No.4 to approach the competent civil court and seek issuance of genuine succession certificate and upon furnishing such succession certificate issued by competent civil court before the respondent No.2/ registering authority, the respondent/registering authority shall pass appropriate orders by .t\ following the circular instructions issued by the Commissioner and Inspector General of Registration and Stamps, Telangana, Hyderabad uide Circular Memo No.G3/912212024, dated 12.08.2024 and strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of furnishing of such succession certilicate by the petitioner, subject to the petitioner complying with the provisions of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, and Indian Stamps Act, 1899. It is also open to the Registering

¶46

¶47

Authority to refuse to register the subject document, by specifically assigning the reasons in terms of Section 7l of the Act, 1908 and communicate the said decision to the petitioner.

¶48

It is made clear that mere registration of the document does not confer title on the subject property and it is also made clear that this order would not have any bearing on all those matters where title/rights of the parties are pending before the authorities either in revision/appeals for adjudication and in any other case this order also does not preclude the parties in asserting their rights before a competent Court of law.

¶49

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶50

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

¶51

SD/-T. TIRUMA!DEVI DEPUTY REGI^TRAR

¶52

//TRUE^COPY//

¶53

SECTION^gFFlcER

¶54

To 1. The Princrpal^{Secretary, Registration and Stamps Department' Secretariat'} State of Telangana^{at HYderabad'} z in iru-n"SiJkar,^{Nagarkurnool at NagarkurnoolDistricJ'} i. ih" O"tra^{Registrar, Registration and Stamps Department'At} MahabdoUnagar,^{Mahabqobnagar District'} 4 TilffiJi; EF^{iiin nevrNuE,Highcourtror the stateor relansana at} HYderaQad. [QUrl s. 6;;-ii i" dnt^{a.'sntNtvesUlU,Advocate[oPUc]}

¶55

Two QD^Copieo SA BS

HIGH COURT

DATED:06t02t202s

ORDER

WP.No.3365 of 2025

i
I .THE
( cR S; 14 'a
c).
o 0 3 APB 2025 (]
i) c)
a, .f

¶61

DISPOSING OF THE W.P wlrHouT^cosrs.

¶62

@
b p(
+

Smt. Avutha Shanthamma v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Avutha Shanthamma v. The State of Telangana

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

Kalluri Jayarami Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

M.A. Haleem, Vs The State of Telangana

Shaik Naser Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammad Khadeer Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Visakha Patil Vs The State of Telangana

Arigela Narsaiah and Ano. Vs Prl. Secy., Rev. Dept. and 2 Ors.