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

Sri. Medaboina Ashok, Sio. Sri. M.Balanarsimha, Aged about 52 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. H.No.1-73, Aushapur Village, Ghatkesar Mandal, Medchal- Malkajgiri Dist., Telangana. Sri. Niedaboina Jangaiah, S/o. Sri. M.Balanarsimha, ASqq about 49-years, Occ. Agriculture, R7o. H,No.1-73, Aushapur Village, Ghatkesar Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri Dist., Telangana. ...PETITIONERS AND

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Rep. by its Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. Th6 District Collector, Medchal- Malkajgiri District, Hyderabad. 3. The Commissioner Stamps and Registration, Nampally, Hyderabad. 4. The District Registration, Medchal- Malkajgiri District. 5. The Sub Registrar, Ghatkesar, Medchal- Malkajgiri District- ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 oI the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an Order Direction or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari by calling for the records relating to and in connection with the Refusal order of the sth Respondent,s lntimation of refusal order communicated through letter Memo No. 150isRo/Ghatkesar/2025, dated. 1910612025 refusing to registER the sal6 deed vide P. No. 10212025, Dated. 1910612025, relating to Open Residential Plot bearing No.71111 , in Survey Nos.63, 64' 67, 68 and 69, admeasuring 240 Sq.Yds., or 200.6 Sq.mts., situated at Aushapur village, Under Ghatkesar Municipality, Ghatkesar Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Telangana state (Herein called as said property) for the reasons based on validated document violating section 17 of registration Act (W.A No.446 of 2021) for being illegal, arbitrary, violative of provisions of the registration Act, '1 908, discriminatory and u ncon stitution a I and consequenfly further direct the 4th and 5th Respondent to register and release the document purported to be a sale deed lA NO:'l OF 2025 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 4th and 5th respondent to register and release the pending document P.10212025. dated 1910612025 relating to Open Residential plot bearing No.711il , in Survey Nos.63, 64,67,68 and 69, admeasuring 240 Sq.yds., or 200.6 Sq.mts , Situated at Aushapur Village, Under Ghatkesar Municipality, Ghatkesar Mandal, Medchai-Malkajgiri District. Telangana State pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. N. ANI RUDH Counsel for the Respondents: cP FOR STAMPS AND REGISTRATTON The Court made the fottowing:bRDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.18O53 of 2o25 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 2Ol9 and batch dated 11.01.2023 and also the recent Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. Gopi Vs. The Sub-Registrarr 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 1 2oT SCC OnLiEe SC 74O \ 2 sr,J W.p.No.18OS3 of 2O2S submitted the document before the respondents and if they submit the document, they have to consider the subject to compliance of the provisions of the Registration Act, 190g and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The relevant portion of 4 the order in W.P.No. 16310 of 2Ol9 and batch dated 1 1.01.2023 is as under:

13. The power of the registering authority to refuse rcgistration is only, if any of the g.rounds or objections that are enumerated under the provisions of the Registration Act, 190g, and the Rules made thereunder id particular Sections lg,20,21,2,2_A, 34. 35 an<l rule 58 of the Telangana Rules under the Registration Act, 190g, are existing in respect of any such document presenterl lor the registration. Irxcept, the grounds or objections that are enumerated under the provisions of the Registration Act, l9Og, the registering authorities have no authority to refuse registration of a document on an-y othcr ground_ As already noted above, the ground on rvhich the impugned refusal 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 document. By looking into a validitl' 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 (1 supra), the registering authority is not entitled to go into the title of the parties to the document. It is a settled law that the vendee under a document w l not get a better title 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 title over such property and mere 3 sriJ w.P.No.18053 of 2O25 registration of such document will not have an effect on the property which is the subject matter of the said document. i4. 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 registerable document cannot be accepted and such a ground is not available to the registering authorities to refuse registration of a document on that ground.

19. In the light of the above, this Court is unhesitant to hold 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 comptying with the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and the lndian 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 registering officer cannot refuse to register the document if all the procedural compliaoces 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 4 vr.p.No.18os3 "ri{;! has title to the property which he is seeking to transfcr. once the registering authority is satisfied that the parties to rhe document are present before him and the parties admit execution thereof before him, subject to making procedurar compriances as narrated above, the document must be registered. The execution and registration of a documcnt have the effect of transferring only those rights, if any, that the executant possesses. If the executant has no right, tifle, or interest in the property, the registered document cannot effect any trans[er.

6. In view of the order passed in W.p.No.163 10 of 2079 and batch dated lt.Ol.2023 and also the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. Gopi,s case (supra l) 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 petitioners in respect of the subject plots without reference to the Memo No. 15O/SRO/Ghatkesar /2025, dated i9.06.2O25 issued by the respondent No.5 with respect to the intimation of refusal of the pending Document No.p.lO2/2025, dated lg.06.2O2S and subject to condition of the said document complying with the provisions of the Registration Act, 190g and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. There shall be no order as to costs. 5 SI(,J W.P.No.78053 oJ 2O25 7 Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed. ,/TRUE COPY// SD/.8 ASSISTAN . REKHA RANI EGISTRAR SEC FFICER To, 1 The Principal Secretary' Revenue Departqelt: ?e:retariat' 2 The District collector, t'bo'Jr'J'r-i'1';rt"t'-rg'ri oistrict' H'aerabad T S 'Hyderabad' iff$*$ry*'gpfi$tem;:': .,^

8. Two CD CoPies B TVI BS N.- HIGH COURT DATED:2710612025 ORDER WP.No.18053 ot 2025 IRo( I ( 1 0 J Ut c ..[.,: * b-^ T Eht o (J T * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 1 tT T