Chereddy Bala Rami Reddy v. 1. The State of Telangana

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 toto issue Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of t\4andamus declaring the Refusal order vide 2612023 of the 4th respondent i.e., The Sub Registrar, Kukatpally, Medchal Nilalkajgiri District, in refusing to receive, register and release the Sale Deed presented by the petitioner in respect of House bearing H.No.1-2-48114 with built up area 175 Square feet A.C.C on plot bearing No.14 in Sy.No.51& 53 admeasuring 250 Square Yards Situated in Hyder Nagar, Kukatpally Medchal-Malkajgiri District, on the ground of the document is based on the validated document as a link document and validated document cannot be treated as a Link Document vide Letter C& lG Endt.No.ClG.MailiAR/2008, dated 0210112008, is illegal, arbitrary, in violation of Articles14,21a: )i]0-AofConstitutionoflndiaanclalscirviolationof Registration Act '()C i besides in violation of principles of raturel justice and consequently to d r=t t respondent No 4 to receive and registe' t re Sale Deed presentedbyther€'lirnerinrespectofHousebearingH,No'1-,1-43ll4Withbuilt up area 175 Sqrlilr feet A C.c on plot bearing No 14 irr Sl" No 51 & 53 admeasuring250s;q,,.rreYardsSituatedinHyderNagar,KLrkatl,allyMedchal- \vithout reference of Doc vrde -e ter C& lG Malkajgiri Distri( t Endt.No.ClG.tt/a il/ \R I ()08, dated 021 01 I 20OB' IAN O:1OF 2025 Petitionunc6rj()Ctionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstt:ncesStatedin the affidavit fileci i r s r':port of the writ petition, the High Court n a) be pleased to l to receive and register the Sale Deetl cr(,,sented by the direct respondent ll( t)ui t up area 175 :rf House bearing H.No.1-2-481 14 with petitioners in re s [,(t'] r plot bearing No.14 in Sy.No.51 & 53 :ldlneasuring 250 Square feet A C.t) r:,:l in Hyder Nagar, Kukatpally Medchal-lt4a kajgiri District' Square Yards Situa < f Letter C and lG Endt.No.ClG.lr/ail/AR/ 2008, dated without referencer : isposal of the above writ petition. O2lO1l2OO8, Pending Counsel for the Peti ioner : SRI BHAVARAJU SAIVIKAS Counsel for the Re's tondents: GP FOR STAMPS AND REGISTIIAT|ON The Court made ll'e following: ORDER l ! THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.11431 of2025 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration for the respondents and perused the entire material on record'

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W'P'No'16310 of 2Ol9 and, batch dated l1'Ol'2O23 and a-lso the recent Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K' Gopi Vs The Sub-Registrarl and requested to pass similar order in this writ Petiti.on.

3. Learned Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration has not disputed the submission made by the learned counsel lor the petitioner'

4. The relevant portion of the order in W.P.No.163 1O of 2Ol9 and batch dated l1'01'2O23 is as under: SC(l Onl,ine SC 740 '2025 .> sI(,J W.P.N-o.1143 7 of 2025

13. 'l'Irr: 1 o' onl1, i[ rr. the pr or ir ri< therer n(l( I 58 ol l] c exist rrg n regist|a tic rr under 111( authlrit e ,. any oll'rrrr e impt ;;rrr < pass:1 ls l1 is a ..a'i<l,r validi I o verif, n! "r harirg ':.1i held in lc NaidL- 1l iL trtlcoltrl unck:r a r Lc case f "( n thc lrll t(1 said ,1o,:t:-r regisrlrar i rr u,hic ir ir, lr

14. .rrs i ie Starrps a n to r-eluse r-, the i:{( c.l valL(lal.d ( docu.nc n I the reg sre thal gr( L Ir - of the registering authority to refuse registra[ on is 'rhe grounds or objections that are enLn]cf iitr:-l ruder . of the Registration Act, 1908, and tlle ll-rles rradc : lrarticular Sections 19,20,21,22-A, a'\ ll:r :Ln 1 rule: , :angana Rules under the Registration A.t 1:r0 l, are -espect of any such document presente 1 to lh(l ;::ccpt, the grounds or objections that .1rc 'l rrlm rralcd :rrisions of the Registration Act, 1908, trle .rgisterjrrg I L\,c no authority to refuse registration of a clot:r Lm''nt on , ,-rnd. As already noted above, the ground olt v'ri,rh Lhr: . 'usal orders in all these batch of Wr t l'e ,i' tot s arr: , I rhe link document shorvn in the respe( live 1( cu n3nls ( 1 and an unregistered document. 81' krokirg n-o a - , link document, the re gistering authol itf i:; trd rt:cll'1' r lher the executants of the respectivc docL n el.l s are itle or not to execute the documents in clrtes.ti' rn. As - ,r,vc rcferred judgment in the casc of Dr. Yac l; R tn'tcslr -a), tl.re rcgistering authority is not cntit|rd to g ) ir to the i ities to thc document. It is a settled lalr' lhitl LlIl 'e rdee r rment will not get a better title than his !'er d')r lrd ir-I ' - is not having a valid title over the proper r ir-)Lir:h is natter of a particular document, the vcndee i 1( cr Lh(l , nr does not get any LiLIe over such propcrl\ lll( lnere ' such document will noL have an effect oLl L l. l)I oPcrt)' -,ubject matter of thc said document. .] conceded by the Iearned Governmcnt Plla( er lor legistration, the registering authorities a:c rt I rnlilled srration of a document on mere ground 1ll.r1 l -,e ti le of Lls of the respectivc document is baserl ll)( 11 t1'lc lrment, though the same is compulsorilv elis e:abie rnot be accepted and such a ground is not ar ail rble to ig authorities to refuse registration of a dt c l.nlnt on t) I that fhc € regi; r-a tiL:,r refe-r-ec o r the light of the above, this Court is unhesrtarrl o hold j )ondent registering authorities are not eoritl(rd to r,:iuse r)f a document on the ground that thc linl loc umertt i r Lhe respective document is a validatcd docrirlcr t or 1o i l I I I I 1 i ! I I i I I T I w7 ., SI(, J W.P.No.7 7431 of 2O25 refuse registration of such document by placing reUance on cndorsement, dated 02.01 2008, issued by the Commissioner and Inspector General ot Stamps and Re8istration' Accordingly' the impugned orders in the respective Writ Petitions are set aside and Writ Petitions are allowed with a further direction to the respondent registering authorities to receive the returned documents and to process the same subject to the condition of the said documents complying with the provisions of the Registration Act' 1908 and the lndian StamP Act, 1899'

5. ln K. Gopi's case (supra 1), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: "The registering officer is not concerned with the title held by the executant. He has no adjudicatory power to decide whethcr the executant has any title' Even if an executant executes a sale deed or a lease in respect of a land in respect of which he has no title' the registering officer cannot rcfuse to register the document if all the procedural compliances are made and the necessary stamp duty as well as registration charges/fee are paid We may note here that under the scheme of the 1908 Act, it is not the function of fhe Sub- Registrar or Registerlng Authority to ascertain whether the vendor has title to the property which he is seeking Lo transfer' Once the rcgistering authority is satisfied that thc parties to the doclrment are present before htm and the parties admit execuLion thercof before him, subject to making procedural compliances as narrated above' thedocumentmustberegistered'Theexecutionandregistrationofa documenthavetheeffectoftransferringonlythoserights'ifany' that the executant possesses' If the executant has no iight' title' or interest in the property, the registerecl document cannot effect any transfer

6. In view of the order in W.P.No.16310 of 2Ol9 and batch dated 1 l-O7.2O23 and also the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K' Gopi's case (supra 1)- t I 4 sr(, J W.P,No.11.L3t of 2025 ( and for tlr: rt:asons mentioned therein, tl-re Petition "\r:i. dispos,:1 rf by setting aside the impugrLcd order of 1S Refusat da1r,l 12.1O.2023 passed by the responcrent No.4 and thr: r:s r,,trdent authorities are directtld tc re ceive the returne,l c r: tlments and process the same s r ljr:ct to the condition c I the said documents complyinll u'ith the provisiot'ts , thc Registration Act, 1908 an'1 tlre Indian Stamp ,\ct, l[399. There sha1l be no order as to t osts.

7. NIi ,,::cllaneous petitions, if any pencing in this nrrit pelitior shall stand closed SD/.L. U'IAYA L ASSIS'T[ ANT REGI MI R //TRUE COPY// siE(:)TloN FFICER To, ; iit5ct* : € j ;,il{ #j,""'$'.11", :: ::: :: fi H" :: : ::ff ' " i'$flffiili..[fl'#-t['' ffiilsirt r' c' u * r'r'ih e l ffi$ : l 7 B iwo CD C'o I r:s One soaro ( 'Y BSK \1r \ I ::\ S TATi,-' o 1s lir\ TiiS r n HIGH COURT SK,J DATED:1710t*t?025 .l o ORDER WP.No.11431 af 2025 t i;( oe:;i,>\ :, -i. DISPOSING ()F THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT CC ISTS 1F .dd &^,