Allowed

Hariharan Kalyanakrishnan v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC7 Nov 2025WP/33746/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the High Court disposed of the case at the admission stage, directing the Sub-Registrar to register and release a Partition Deed without reference to LGC No. 167 of 1997, subject to compliance with the Registration and Stamps Acts, while clarifying that registration does not confer title.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Respondent No. 3 (Sub-Registrar) to register and release the partition deed without reference to LGC No. 167 of 1997, subject to statutory compliance.

Hariharan Kalyanakrishnan Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³³⁰²¹

¶2

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

¶3

FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 33746 oF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

1 H-ariharan Kalyanakrishnan, s/o. Shivaraman Kalyana Krishnan. Aoed about l9.ye?ls,^{occupation . Private Service, R/o. 5_302, purva} Fairriont, 24th Main, 25th Cross, HSR Layout, Sector-2,'Bengaturu, K;rn;taia-560 1rd.'^-'

¶9

2 ?pnt9^{h Kalyana.Krishnan,S/o. Shivaraman Kalyana Krishnan,Agedabout} 15.ye-a-rs,^{o-ccupation.private Service, R/ o. B_30i,} Gala Aria. Souti Booal. - Gata Mart, Bopal, Ahmedabad District, Gujarat State_3g005g.

¶10

.....PETITIONERS

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, principal Secretary (Stamps and Registration), Secretariat, Hyderibad.

¶13

The District Registrar, Hyderabad District.

¶14

The Sub Registrar, Marredpally, Secunderabad.

¶15

.....RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 ot lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue writ or direction preferably writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No.3, in not receiving, registering and releasing .the subject Partition Deed presented in respect of the House bearing Municipal No. 10-3-22 (PTl No.^'l 181005787) in survey No. 74110, situated at East Marredpally, within the limits of Greater Hyderabad Municipal corporation, Secunderabad Mandal and circle, Hyderabad District, is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to provisions of law and violation of Article 300-4 of the constitution of lndia, and consequently direct the Respondent No.3 to receive, process, register and release the subject Partition Deed/ any other deeds that may be presented by the

¶17

petitioner in respect of House bearing Municipal No. 10-3-22 (pI No. 1181005787Yin Survey No. 74t10, situated at East Marredpally, within the limits of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation. Secunderabad Mandal and Circte, Hyderabad District without reference to LGC No. 16zt1ggr.

¶18

|.A.NO:1 OF 2025

¶19

' Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.3 forthwith to receive, process, register and release the subject Sale Deed presented in respectof the House bearing Municipal No. 10-322 (PTl No. 1181005787) in Survey No. 74t10, situated at East Marredpally, within the limits of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Secunderabad Mandal and Circle, Hyderabad District without reference to LGC No. 16Tt1gg7, pending disposal of the writ petition in the interest of justice.

¶20

counsel for the Petitioners : Ms. BOBBALA JyorHlRMAl counsel for the Respondents : MRS S.SRAVANTH|, AGp FoR REVENUE The court at the stage of admission made the following ORDER

¶21

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH

¶22

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

. Heard Ms. Bobbala Jyothirmai, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mrs. S.Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing for the respondents. With their consent, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itself.

¶25

It is the case of the petitioners that the Respondent No.3-Sub Registrar in not receiving, registering and releasing the Partition Deed presented in respect of the House bearing Municipal No. LO-3-22 (PTI No. 1 181005787) in Survey No.7a/ 1O situated at East Marredpally, within the limits of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Secunderabad Mandal and Circle, Hyderabad District, and also stated that the State AS Government is claiming the subject property

¶26

¶27

'Government land,in LGC No. 167 of 1997. Aggrieved by the action of the Registering Authority in not registering the subject document, the present writ petition is filed.

¶28

Learned Counsel for the petitioners further submits that the issue involved in . this matter is connected w,ith W.p.No.19106 of 2OIO, which is filed by the State Government against the order in LGC.No. 16T of 1997 passed by the Special Court under the A.p. Land Grabbing (prohibition) Act, 19g2, Hyderabad and the sarne was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court on 28.05.2025. Therefore, learned counsel requested to allow the writ petition by directing the respondent No.3_ Sub Registrar to register the docu.ment presented by the petitioners.

¶29

On the other hand, learned Assistant Government pleader for Stamps and Registration has not disputed the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

(

I I

In^{view of the submissions made by both sides} and in view^{of dismissal of the W'P'No'19106 of 2010 on} 28.05.2021^{the Writ Petitionis disposedof directing the} respondent^{No.3-Sub Registrar to register and release the} document^{presented by the petitioners inrespect of} subject^{property without reference to LGC No'167 of} lgg7, subject^{to the petitioners complyingwith the} provisions of the^{Indian RegistrationAct' 19O8'and} Indian Stamps^{Act, LSgg' It isalso open tothe} Registering^{Authority to refuse the document presented} by the^{petitioners,if anyother objection and} communicate^{the same to the petitioners'}

¶34

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 thosematterswhere title/rights of the} parties are^{pendingbefore the authorities either in} revision/appeals^{for adjudicationand in any other case}

¶35

¶36

this order also does not preclude the parties in asserting their right.s before a competent court of raw. There shafl be no order as to costs.

¶37

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶38

//TRUE COPY//

¶39

SD/-C. DEEPI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR a

¶40

SECTION OFFICER

¶41

¶42

The Principal Secretary,^(Stamps and^{Registration),Secretariat, State of} Telangana at Hyderabad.

¶43

The District Registrar, Hyderabad District.

¶44

The Sub Registrar, Marredpally, Secunderabad.

¶45

Two CCs to GP FoR REVENUE, High^{Courtfor the State of Telangana at} Hyderabad. [OUT] 5. Ohe CC to Ms. BOBBALA JYOTHIRMAI,^Advocate [OPUC]

¶46

Two CD Copies

t I

HIGH COURT

DATED:07111t2025

1hEs
.-Ji
oc
17 I'l0I zmi !i.'
.,,.1.,
-.r- i f, -.,...:r;'i'':.. i.: /'
' : :' -:.:-.''

¶52

ORDER

¶53

WP.No.3374G ot 2O2S

¶54

D ISPOSIN G OF THE W.P 3 c

¶55

Hariharan Kalyanakrishnan v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hariharan Kalyanakrishnan 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

Emmadi Krishnaiah Vs The Government of Telangana

Nazarene Grammar School, Vs The Commissioner and Inspector General

Khetavath Srinu Nayak Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Maddineni Ramesh Babu Vs Sri K. Surendra Mohan Garu

Smt Banavath Shanthi Vs State of Telangana and 4 Others

James Francis Cruz @ F James Cruz Vs The State of Telangana