SRl. M v. DURGA PRASAD

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 Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of the Writ of [\,4andamus, declaring the action of the second respondent in issuing Lr.No.16/5RO/TNDR/2025 daled 2610412025, as being illegal, arbitrary, contrary to record, in violation of Article 14 and 30OA of the Constitution of lndia, 1950 and the law laid down by this Honourable Court in W.P. No. 26137 of 201 9 and batch and further direct the second respondent to comply with the order of injunction, without being served or received from the Court lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in ttrr circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High C I rrt may be pleased kr direct the second respondent to forthwith place Survey I os. 200, 2O1 ,2O3 and 204 all srtuated at Tandur, Vikarabad District in prohibi r -y lrst and refuse any deeds presented for registration pertaining to Survey Nos. 200, 201 ,2O3 and 204 all situated at TandLrr. Vikarabad District pending dispc;al of the above wrii petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. M. V. DURGA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR STAMPS AND Ftl GISTRATION The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.2O3O8 of 2O25 ORDER: Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and iearned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing for the respondents and perused the material on record.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner hled this writ petition challenging the Lr.No. 16lSRO/TNDR/2025 dated 26.O4.2025 issued by the respondent No.2, wherein the request made by the pctitioner was rejected and informed that the registration of the subject property cannot bc stopped unless orders (status quo or injunction) from competent Court to enable them to take lurther action in the matter.

3. Learned counsel lor the petitioner further submits that the petitioncr has filed O.S.No.54 ol 2OO2 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Vikarabad, Ranga Reddy District, wherein the trial Court granted Ad-lnterim Injunction Order .- D dated 30.12.2OO2 in LA.No.4B9 of 2OO2 in O.S.No.54 ot 2002 against. the defendants therein resl r: ining them from aiienating or disposing the schedule prop. -ties in any way ltll 22.Ol.2OO3. Subsequently, the same rr', ; extended up to

18.09.2003. On 29.01.2OO4, as no partv I'as insisting for its disposal on merits, the I.A.No.489 of 2l 12 in O.S.No.54 of 2OO2 was closed, r,r.here it was then

4. Learned counsel lor the petitione r lurthcr submiLs lhat subsecluently, thc O.S.No.54 of 2Oa'.r. . 'as rcnumbered as O.S.No.14 of 2025 on the Iiie of the I 1r cliti<lnal District ,Judge, Vikarabad District. In vieu, <l1' ,he sarne. the petitioner herein made a representation da1( ) 26.O4.2025 to the respondent No.2 requesting not 1() entertain any trarsactions executed in Survey Nos.2OO, 2( 1.,2O3 and 2O4 situated in Tandur as the Interim Order cl: ted 22.07.2OO3 were not vacated. In response to the samc.. the respondent No.2 issued impugned Lr.No.16ISRO/TNDR/2O25 dated 26.04.2O,t j and informed r t ter' 3 that the registration of any property cannot be stopped unless orders (status quo or injunction) from competent Court to enable them to take further action in the matter. Aggrieved by the same, the petitionrr filed present writ petition and requested to iLllow the same by directing the respondent No.2 to cornply with the order of Injunction without being served or received lrom the Court

5. After hearing both sides and on perusing the entire material on record, this Court is of the considered view that as per records, the suit schedule property was not 1n prohibited properties list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908. Moreover, AS per Standing Order 219(b\ of the Registration and Stamps Department, there is no valid order lrom the competent Court to stop the Registration 1n respect of the suit schedule property. Therefore, the respondent authorities cannot stop the registration of the suit schedule property. \- 4

6. Standing Ordei.No.2l9(b) of t[.rr Registration and Stamps Department is reads as follows: "S O.2 19 (b) If a Court restroins o .; ,rsort frorrt alienating a propertA ancl if lte.still cho.se.s t t .tlienote rt.. it is he utlto contrauenes the orders oI the C: ) rt ctttcl rtot I he l?egisteing Offi.cer. If, on. tlrc other hon t tht, Court giues a direction to the Reqisteing offtccrT t zgistratiotl Depaftment, the offi.cer / Department is e.s t..tpetl fr.orn going ahead with the registrtttiort."

7. In view of the sarnc, the re spor ( cnl No.2 rightl). issued the impugned letter d.ated,26.O4.2i 25 jnsistine the petitioncr to produce the copy of order lrcr r thc ccmpetent Court. The contention ol the petition rr is that the injunction order passed by the trial Courl on 30. l2.2OO2 continues till the disposal of the suit hred r, the pctitior-rer. The said <:ontention cannot be accepted r: thc injunctior-r order passed bv the trial Court in I.A.No , g9 ol 2OO2 in O.S.No.S4 of 2OO2 on 30. 12.2OO2 extenrli. I fi-om time to time till 18.09.2003. Thereafter, there is r o urtcnsion of injunction order. Moreover, the I.A.No.1t 9 of 2OO2 in O.S.No.S4 of 2OO2 was closed on 29.01.2tt r4 5r- the trial E 5 Court. In view of the same, there is no valid interim injunction order lrom 18.09.2003. Mere pendency of the O.S.No.54 of 2OO2, which was renumbered as O.S.No.14 of 2025 on the file of the I Additional District Judge, Vikarabad District, is not a valid ground to stop the cancellation of the registration. Therefore, there is no valid ground to stop the registration of the subject property and the said contention of the petitioner cannot be acceptable. B. In view of the same, there is no valid ground to interfere with the orders passed by the respondent No.2 uide Lr.No. 16l SRO/TNDR/2025 dated 26.O4.2025.

9. In view of the above hnding, this Writ Petition is dismissed on devoid of merits. No order as to costs. Miscellareous Petitions, if any, pending in this unit petition shall stand closed. SD/. U. SUDHA ASSISTANT R //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER tV. V. DURGA PRASAD, Ad FOR STAIMPS AND REGIST na at Hyderabad [OUI ate [OPUC] TlON,High Court for the To,

1. One CC to SRl. 2. Two CCs to GP State of Telanga 3. Two CD CoPies BM GJP AJT HIGH COURT DATED:0410912025 ORDER WP.No.20308 of 2025 Rrli . Sl.4 o c o c) i^, 0l c ?ni 'v :r*\lros^t\l * DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WIT {OUT COSTS @ l-( ,\Jre