Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. Gopi vs The Sub-Registrarl and requested to pass similar order

Petition under Article 226 of rhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to lssue an appropriate writ, order or direclioti, more particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No. 2 in not receiving and processing the sale Deed presented before them for registration in respect of the property i.e., Plot No 17, in Sy. Nos. 256 and 257, Adm. 500.00 Sq. yards or 418.00 Sq. meters, situated at. Chilkoor Village and Grampanchayat, Moinabad Mandal, R,R. District, as being illegal, arbitrary violative of articles 14 and 21 of the consitutional of lndia besides violative of principles of natural Justice and contrary to law apart from contrary to the law laid down by this Honourable court in P. Anltha and another us the state of relangana and others (W.P. No. 16272 ol 2019) and consequenfly direct the Respondent No. 2 to forthwith receive and process the sale Deed basing on the validated sale Deed ,- for registration in respect of the property i.e., plot No. 1 7, in Sy. Nos. 256 and 257, Adm.500.00 Sq. yards or 418.00 Sq. meters, situated at, Chilkoor Village and Grampanchayat, Moinabad Mandal, R.R. District IANO: 1OF2 025 Petition under section '15 1 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to drrect the Respondent No.2 to forthwith receive and process the sare Deed basing on the validated Sale Deed for registration in respect of the property i.e., Plot No. 17, in Sy. Nos.256 and 257, Adm. 50000 Sq. yards or 418.00 Sq. meters' situated at chirkoor Virage Grampanchayat, Moinabad Mandar, R R. District pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner : SRI TOKALWAR JYOTI DEVI COUNSEI fOr thc RESPONdENTS: ASST.GP FOR STAMPS AND REGISTRATION The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.161O2 of 2025 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing for the respondents and perused the entire material on record. With their consent, this writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W.P.No. 163 10 of 2O19 and batch dated ll.Ol.2o23 and also 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 petition. 3 Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration has not disputed the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. He submits that the petitioners have not I 2O25SCC online SC 74O sr,J W.P.No.16102 o.f 2O25 submitted the document before the respondents and if they submit the document, they have to consider the same subject to compliance of the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.

4. The relevant portion of the order in W.P.No.1631O of 2Ol9 and batch dated 11.01.2023 is as under:

13. The power of the registering authority to refuse registration is only, if any of the grounds or objections that are enumerated under the provisions oI the Registration Act, 1908, and the Rules made theleunder in particular Sections 19,20,21,22 A, 34,35 and rule 58 of the Telangana Rules under the Registration Act, 1908, are existing in respect of any such document presented for the registration. Except, the grounds or objections that are enumerated under the provisions o[ the Registration Act, 19O8, the registering authorities have no authority to refuse registration cf a document on any other ground. As already noted above, the ground on which the impugned refusa! orders in all these batch of Writ Petitions are passed is that the link document shown in the respective documents is a validated and an unregistered docurhent. By looking into a validity of the link document, the registering authority is indirectly verifying whether the executants of the respective documents are having valid title or not to execute the documents in question. As held in the above referred judgment in the case of Dr. yadla Ramesh Naidu (l supra), the registering authority is not cntitted to go into the title of the parties to the document. It is a settled law that the vendee under a document will not get a better titte than his vendor and in case if vendor is not having a valid title over the property which is the subject matter of a particular document, the vendee under the said document does not get any titte over such property and mere registration of such document will not have an effect on the property -r : which is the subject matter of the said document. w.p.r,t".rctoz ,r i{irs

14. As rightly conceded by the learned Government pleader for Stamps and Registration, the registering authorities are not entitled to refuse registration of a document on mere ground that the title of the executants of the respective document is based upon the validated document, though the same is compulsorily registerabte document cannot be accepted and such a ground is not availabte to the registering authorities to refuse registration of a document on that ground.

19. In the tight of the above, this Court is unhesitalt to hotd that the respondent registering authorities are not entitled to refuse registration of a document on the ground that the link document referred to in the respective document is a validated document or to refuse registration of such document by placing reliance on endorsement, dated 02.01.2008, issued by the Commissioner and Inspector General of Stamps and Registration. 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, lg0g and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.

5. In K. Gopi's case (supra 1), the Hon,ble Supreme Court held as under: "The registering ofhcer is not concerned with the title held by the executant. He has no adjudicatory power to decide whether 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 registerrng officer cannot refuse to register the document it 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 the Sub- Registrar or Registering Authority to ascertain whether the vendor has titte to the property which he is seeking to transfer- Once the registering authority is satisfied that the parties to the document are present before him and the parties admit execution thereof before l I 4 sr,J W.P.I,to.761O2 of 2O2S him, subject to making procedural compliances as narrated above, the document must be registercd. The execution and registration of a document have the effect of fansferring only those rights, if any, that the executant possesses. If the executant has no right, tiue, or interest in the property, the registered document cannot effect any transfer.

6. In view of the order passed in W.p.No.16310 of 2019 and batch dated Il.Ol.2023 and also the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. Gopi,s case (supra 1) and for the reasons mentioned therein, the Writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities to receive and register the sa-le deed presented by the petrtloners in respect of the subject plots without taking the objection raised by them that the link document is a validated document and subject to condition of the said document complying with the provisions of the Registration Act, 190g and the Indian Stamp Act, 1g99. There shall be no order as to costs.

7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ petition, shalt stand closed. To, //TRUE COPY// SD/-MOHD. ISMAIL EPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

1. Ihe principal Secretary, D_epartmeit of Revenue, Stamps and Registration Department, Secretariat, State of Telangana, Hyderabad -

2. The Sub-Registrar, Chevella, R.R. District. 3. One CC to SRI TOKALWAR JyOTt DEVt, Advocate tOpUCl \ 4 Two CCs to GP FOR STAMPS AND REGISTRATION, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

5. Two CD Copies BSK BS s HIGH COURT \ DATED:13to6t2o2s I I I I ( q J c ) 5H E 1 rgT,{ 23 JUll 216 ,l t sF 3' a ORDER WP.No.16102 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS @fi'o %{-