The High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declarrng the inaction of the Official Respondents more particularly Official Respondent Nos.2 to 4 in not removing the Petition Schedule ! I t Properties bearrng H.Nos.3-5-121lEl116,3-5-121tEl1l6t1 3-S-121|Et1t6t2,3-S- 121lEll1614. 3-5-121lEt1t6tS, 3-5-121lEl11616, and 3-S-t '_1tE,t116fi situated at Ramkote, Eden Garden, King Koti, Hyderabad - 5OO 001 frr n the list of prohibited list of properties inspite of representation dt: 30_01 .2023. a: t eing illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 an<l also in violation of Art. 14. 21 and 3004 of the Constitution of lndia and conseqrr ,ntly direct the Official Respondent Nos.2 to 4 to remove:the said properties frcr I the prohibited list of properties. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ,; 1)urtstances stated tn the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High C: rl may be pleased to direct the official Respondents more particularly officral Re r pondent Nos.2 to 4 to forthwith act upon the represenlation dt.30.0'l .2023, b5 rlirecting the official Respondent Nos.2 to 4 to suspend the entry of the petiticr Schedule properties bearing H.Nos.3-5 1 21 lEl 1 16, 3-5-121 lEt 1 t6t 1, 3-5 1 21 tEl 1 t a 2! 3-5-12i tEl 1 t6t 4, 3- 5-121|El116/5, 3-5-121lEl11616 and 3-5-121lEl1l6fi situa r c at Ramkote, Eden Garden, King Koti, Hyderabad - 500 0O'l from the list o, prohibited properties, pending disposal of the above writ petition. lA NO:2 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ci cumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the+rrit petition, the High cc,r rt may be pleased to ---.. direct the official Respondents more partrcularly official Re; ),rndent Nos.2 to 4 to forthwith act upon the representation dt. 30.01 .2023, by cirecting the official Respondent Nos.2 to 4, pending disposal of the above writ 6rr I tisp. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI ASAD HUSSAIN Counsel for the Respondent Nos.l to 3: SRI K. MURALIDII rR REDDy. Counsel for the Respondent No.4: MS. HARITHA KIRAN, GP FOR REVENUI Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI AHMED EHTESHAI/ KAWAB The Court made the following: ORDER AGP FOR STAMPS ANI) REGISTRATION THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AtrqIL KUMAR JUKANTI WRIT PETITION NO.O\t 13 ot2023 ORDER: This Writ Petition is frled seeking the follou'ing relief "...to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature o[ writ of Mandamus declarinB t]e inaction of the Officiai Respcndents more particularly Ofhcial RespondenL Nos 2 to 'i in r]''t removing Lhe Petition Schedule Propenies bearing H'Nos 3-5 nt 1e1 r 1 O, 3 5-12r I E I t I 6 I 1, 3-s'1'2 t l lt',I \ I 6 I 2' 3-5 |il'ptrtoto, z s r2rlElt/6/5, : s r2rlE"t/5.16 situated ar Rnmkote' Edeil ".a' Or.O"r, King Koti, Hyderabad - 50C CO I fro:rr lhe list of O-nat"O llst of pttpettlce in spite of representation i,.SO.O t.rOZS, as being iliegal, arbitrary" contla'Il fro,rision" of the Registration Act' 1908 and also in iolation of Art. 14, 21 and 3OOA of the ConstLrution of India and consequently direct the Officral Respondent Nos.2 to 4 to remove the said propeities from the prohibited list of Properties and rrass "" i s l2ll'lll6lT -!o

2. Heard Mr.Asad Hussain' learr-cd coei sel for th'e petitioners, Mr.K.Mura-lidhar Redd-v' learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent i'{os' 1 to 3' Ms.Haritha Kiran, learned Assistant (iovernmerrt Pleader for Starnps and Registra[ion appearlng on behalf of respondent No.4 and Ivlr'Ahmed Ehtesham Kawab' Iearrred counsel for resPondent No'5' .| i t I 2 JAK,J ll j r l-'l ol 2021

3. It is the casc of petitioners that a rr:l r:sent.ation dated 30.O 1 .2023 was made to respond('r r No.4 for removal of propcrties from prohibited list. [t is sr-rbmittr:d that Office of District Registrar placed the propt rties in the prohibited [ist, as if they are covered by a Corr- stay'order in Writ Petition No.31 101 of 2021. Attention i ; invited to page No.38 of the annexed document and point:,1 ont that said propcrt ies arc not being removed from t h: trohibitcd list on ground that a stay is in operation grant ri bv High Court.

1. Learnc-d counsel for petitioners sutrrr i tc.ci that learned Single Judgr: of this Court on 3O. 11.2() | I directed the ofhce of Disl.rict Registrar/ respondent No.ll n t trc Writ Petition No.31 101 of 2O2l to consider the reprcs jntation of rcspondent No..5 herein dated 25.09.2021. I is lurther submitted that a direction merely to cc: r s;ider the representation cannot be interpreted, as if it is n order of stay. It is also submitted that ofhce of Disl.ri,: Registrar rvrongly interpreted the qlder of learned Singk. . udgc, and hzrs placed the subjcct property in the prohibitr:r I lisr. 3 JAK,J W.P.No-5313 of 2023

5. It is submitted that such an interpretation of Court order is detrimental to the interest of petitioners, that a direction be issued to de notify the subject properties from the prohibited list.

6. Learned counsel appearing on beha-lf of respondent No.4 submitted that, a suit vide O.S.No.984 of 2015 is pending on the file of the XXIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Courts (presently XXVI Additiona,l Chief Judge, City Civil Courts), Hyderabad, filed by respondent No.5 and five others, seeking the following prayer. "That the plaintiffs therefore pray that this Honble Court may be pleased to pass judgment and decree in favour of the plaintiffs ald against defendant Nos.1 to 7 jointly and severally: a) Granting a declaration that the Schedule Property is Property continues and remains irnpressed with the trden Garden (Sahebzada Mir Mumtaz Ali Khan) Trust by declaring that the Transfer Deed dated O7.12.2OO4 is null and void; b) Granting a consequential Injunction restraining the defendants from alienating Schedule Property in breach of the Eden Gardenfsa&reb zad.a Mir Mumtaz Ali Khan) Trust created under the Trust Dced dated 19.05. 1961 by 4 JAK,J $' '.No 5'll3 of 2021 His Exalted Highness Late Nawab Mir Sir )smiln Ali Khal Bahadur, the Nizam of Hyderabad alci : :rar: c) Directing the defenda;rts to render a truc, : )-rcct al]d compleLe account of the Eden Garden (Saht bzada Mir- MumtiLz Ali Khar-tl Tru st: d) Appointing neu, Trustee(s) for the administr r icn of the trdcn Gardcn {Sahebzada Mir Mumtaz Ali Khir r) Trust e) Awarding 1() the plaintiffs costs of this suit; arr I l) Grantir-rg such other or further relief or rcli, fs as this Hon'ble Court mav cleem frt a,nd proper in t r r interests ofjLrstice and in the circumstances of the cas:

7. It is submitted that subject properties bel rng to trust and that they are beneficiaries of trust and r s such any alienations woulcl alfect their rights. It is su: nitted that document Nos.5 and 6 annexed as material I .rpers were executed f-1. petitioners arld no further transacl ons can be effected u'ith respondents 1n respect ol scheduled properties. It is pointed out that, if Registrar is 1,t:rmitted to allow further registrations, it would lead c) multipic transactions arrd litigations would follorv, hence, direction be issued for registration of propertie{l t 5 JAK.J W.P.No.5313 o12023

8. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of official respondents submitted that District Registrar placed the subject properties under prohibited list after considcring the representation dated 25.O9 .2021 as per thc directions of the Court. That once'properties are in prohibited 1ist, the remedy is not a writ petition, but to avail remedies, in accordance with law.

9. HearC learned counsel for petitioners, learned counsel for respondents, considered the submissions and perused the record.

10. On perusai of the record ald the documents filed, it appears that, O.S.No-984 of 2O15 is pending on the file of XXIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Courts (presently XXVI Additional Chief Judge, City Cn'il Courts), Hyderabad, writ petition bearing No.31 1O 1 of 2O2 1 was frled by the respondent No.s with a prayer to consider the representations dated 77.O1.2O18 and 25-09.2021- Learned Single Judge of this Court by order dated

30.Ll.2O2l held as follows: 'Questioning the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 not considering his representations dated 17.01-2018 6 JAK.J \\ t I\o.53ll012023 arld 25.O9.2021 and the proceedings dated 04.11.2021 issued by respondent No.3, the petltioner has 'j ed the prescnt \irit pctition. Having rcgard to the nature of the grievan: petitLoner, without going into the merits or dcr:t the case. and since O-S.No.984 of 2O15 filed petitioner and his family members in respec subject property is pending adjudication, the writ Petition is disposing of directing responder] arrd 3 to consider the representation dated 25.09- the petitioner before t:rking up the document presented for registration in respect of the propertl ." ) of the :r'its of by the ()f the )resent Nos.2 lo2l of i]' arry, r'l bj ect i 1. On pcrusal of the order of learned Single Iudge, it is apparent that, it is only a direction to cc n.sider tl.e . representation of the peLitioners. By an1' sit.retch of imagination, the said order is not aIr order of sitay or an order granting a sta), of registration of propertit'r . t2. It dcfte s the logic of this Court as to hou -ire District Registrar concluded the order of the learned [i ngie Judge to be an order of stay and has inducted .he subject properties in prohibited list as if there is a dircr ti6n ly 1fis Court. Such an interpretation is misconceived ' L 7 . JAK,J W.P,No.53l3 of 2023

13. Learned counsel appearing on behaif of respondent No.5 tried to impress upon the Court with regard to the titledisputeandtheLreneficiariesofthesubjectproperties of trust, this Court is not inciined to delve into these aspects as O.S.No.9B 4 of 2Ol5 is pending on the file of competent Court. This Court holds that placing of the subject properties in the prohibited' list by the Office of District Registrar on the basis of order dated 30 1 1 '2021' (as reflected in prohibited list column No'5) is a misconceived interpretation' No orders of any competent Court have been placed before this Court to demonstrate that the said properties are prevented from being registered. Petitioners are permitted to make a representation to District Registrar and the Office of District Registrar, is directed to consider Ltre representatton of petitroners within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of ttris order and pass appropriate order(s) by taking into consideration the observations made by this Court. Respondents are at liberly to h1e appiication/ petitions to avail remedies in accordance with law. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in K'Gopi us The Sub- \ \ 8 JAK,J \\ I N o.53l3 of2023 Registrar in Civil Appeal No.3954 of 2025, he r that Sub- Registrar is not r:mpor,r,,ered to delve into the art rcct of title under the Registration Act, 1908. 74 . With aforesaid observation(s), . rit 1 t:tition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs- Miscelianeous Petitions, if any, pending . r this writ petition shall stand closed. ]D/- L.VIJAYA LAXMI IPTANT REGISTRAR ASS ,TRUE COPY// \ \ \1 SECTION OFFICER \ To, 1 2 J 4 5 6 7 o I TJ TKS The Principal Secretary. Registration and Stamps Dep i Department Secretariat. The State of Telangana. HyC( rtmenU Revenue r;ebad The Commissioner and lnspector General of Registrali Telangana. 5-3-953, Nizam Shahi Rd, [Vlozamjahi tr,4arl' Risala Abdullah Colony, Jam Bagh, Hyderabad, Telan! ,n and Stamps,, :t, Heza Estate, ana,500095. The District Collector,, Hyderabad District, Nampally. li Lane, Abids, Hyderabad, Telangana 500 001. 8-505, Chirag All The District Registrar, Registration Departmer, 11-4-64 Burhanuddin Red Hills, Lakdikapul, Hyderabad, Telan; One CC to Sri Asad Hussain, Advocate IOPUC] Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the Stak: Hyderabad [OUT] Two CC to The GP for Stamps and Registration, High t Telangana, at Hyderabad[OUT] l./4, Red Hills Road, )na {0OOO4, :f Telangana, at )ourt for the State of One CC to Ahmed Ehtesham Kawab, Advocate[OPtJ( l Two CD Copies f]'/ HIGH COURT DATED:2210912025 ORDER WP.No.5313 of 2023 t { <i- i)' .J lllE S 3() 19 r ?0?6 c I .(_=\g l- * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS @ dY a\r\'