Alampur Sai Baba Goud 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 to issue Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of I\,4andamus declaring impugned refusal Order No. 90/2023lR0(08) in Lr. No. 870/RO(OB)12O23 dt.10.05.2023 passed by the 3rd respondent/Joint Sub- Registrar-l vide Pending Document No. 25412023 in respect of Flat bearing No.502 on the Stn floor,'Siri Signature' Apartment, Block-G with built up area of 1570 sq.ft. including common amenities and 80 sq.ft of carparking together with undivided share of land admeasuring 48 sq.yards (out of 868.5 sq-yards) constructed on PIot No.35, 36, 37 and 38 in Sy.No.27, situated at Guttala Begumpet village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District as illegal, arbrtrary and in violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the a provisions of Registration Act and consequently to set asid,: the same by directing the 3rd respondent to receive, register and release the gift :;r ttlement deed. I.A.NO:1 OF 2025 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the r; the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court ntr the 3th' respondent to receive, register and release the dt.1510412023 vide pending Doc.No. P25412023, presentecl as otherwise petitioner stands to suffer serious hardship an j 'cumstances stated in y be pleased to direct Gift Settlement deed by petitioner forthwith irreparable loss. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI N.MANOHAR Counsel for the Respondents : SMT S.SRAVANTHI, AGP t OR REVENUE The Court at the stage of admission made the following () IDER I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.21684 of 2 025 THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 Between: Alampur Sai Baba Goud AND ...Petitioner The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Stamps and Registration Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and Two others. ...Respondents ORDER: Heard Sri N. Malohar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. S.Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing for the respondents and perused the material on record. With their consent, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itself. o

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition seeking to declare the impugned refusal Order No.9O 12023 /RO(OB) in Lr.No.87OlRO(OB) / 2023 dated 10.05.2023 passed by respondent No.3-Joint Sub-Registrar-I uide Pending Document No.P.254/ 2 2023 in respect of FIat bearing No.5O2 on ti 3 Stt' floor, Siri Signature Apartment, Block-G with built up are€ of 1570 Sq.feet including common amenities and 8O Sq.feet of car parking together with undivided share of land admeast I ing 48 Sq.yards (out of 868.5 sq.yards) constructed on Plot Nos.li ',36,37 and 38 in Sy.No.27, situated at Guttala Begumpet villag: Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District (for brevity, "sub;t ct propert/), as illegal and arbitrary.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in order to develop the subject property, the petitior-r tr entered into a Development Agreement-cum-General Power r: Allorney uide DGPA Doc.No.l8O73l2013 dated 13.12.2013 r ith M/s. Sahiti Constructions after obtaining permission from Gr :ater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation uide Perrnit No.4 142 I HO 1' rIZ / Cir - 72 I 20 15 dated 20.04.20 i 5 for construction of residentiat building named 'Siri Signature'

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further s.r .bmits that after 5 completion of the said construction, the petitiorL, r wanted to gift flat bearing No.502 on the 5th floor to his daught:r. Accordingly, the petitioner executed a Gift Settlement Deed n favour of his daughter on 15.04.2023 for registration befort: the respondent No.3. Despite keeping the said document pending the respondent 3 No.3 refused to register the same on the ground that \rithout consent of the developer and apportionment of flats between the landowner and developer, which creates contractual disputes between developer and owner'.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner filed a memo uid.e WPUSR.No.14055612025 dated O5.t2.2O25 with regard to additional material papers and submitting that basing on the same Development Agreement-cum-Genera_1 power of Attorney uide DGPA Doc.No. 18073 /2013 dated 13. 12.2OI3, the respondent authorities registered the sale deeds presented by the developer in his share uide document bearing Nos.7535/2015 dated

12.06.2015, 797612015 dated 27.06.2015, 9564/20t5 dated

30.06.2015, 876412015 dated 17.O7.2015, 9565/2015 dated

30.O7.2015 and L945/2019 dated 06.02.2019. Being the landowner, the petitioner wanted to gift FIat No.5O2 on the 5th Floor of the said building to his daughter and there is no dispute I with regard to the title of the subject property. However, the respondent authorities refused to register the document presented by the petitioner uide irnpugned refusal order No.90 /2023lRO (OB) dated 1O.O5.2O23 and the sarne is illegal and arbitrarSr. R 4

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied up rn the Judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K.Gcoi Vs The Sub- Registra/ and submitted that the registerin 3 authority has no power to decide the title over the subject pr tperty.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner requr sted this Court to allow the writ petition by setting asidr: the impugned refusal order No.9O|2O23|RO(OB) dated l).O5.2O23 and directing the respondent authority to registel and release the document bearing No.P.254/2O23 presented t y the petitioner in the light of the above said Judgment [r1 IF

8. Learned Assistant Government Pleader .:r Stamps and Registration, basing on the oral instructions, sub. nits that there is no clarity with regard to the consent of tl.r developer and apportionment of flats. In view of the same , the respondent authorities rejected to register the document l resented by the petitioner basing on the ground that \rithout consent of the a developer and apportionment of flats between th : landowner and developer, which creates contractual disputes b, tween developer and owner'. 12025 SCC Online SC 740 5

9. Learned Assistant Government pleader for Stamps and Registration further submits that there is no dispute with regard to the documents submitted by the petitioner pertaining to the registered documents of the buyers of the developer,s dnare uid.e WPUSR.No.t4OS56/2025 dated OS.t2.2O2S and requested to pass appropriate orders.

10. After hearing both sides arld on perusal of entire material on record, this court is of the considered view that there is no dispute with regard to the ownership and title over the subject property. As per impugned ord.er, no claritSr with regard to the apportionment of flats between the petitioner and the developer. The contention of the petitioner is that pursualt to the said Development Agreement_cum_General Power of Attorney dated 13.12.2013, the petitioner has received his share of 47yo constructed area and was arlotted and took possession of Flat Nos.101, 103, 203, 4Ol, 4O3, 501,502 and 601 and the remaining share of 53olo consisting of Flat Nos.1O2, 2Ot, 2O2,301, 302, 3O3, 4O2 and 503 were a-llotted to the builder. The said builder a-rienated his share of flats to various buyers under registered sale deeds uid.e document bearing Nos.7535/2O15 dated 12.06.2075, T9Z6 / 2ols l X 6 d,ated, 27.06.2015, 9564 l2Ol5 dated 30.06.2( 15, 8764/2015 d.ated. 17.O7.2015, 9565/2015 dated 3O-O7.2Ol:; and 194512019 dated 06.O2.2019. Moreover, it is settled law, as held by the Hon'lcle Supreme Court in K.Gopi Vs The Sub')legistrar (cited supra) that the registering authority has no po ver to veriff the title over the subject ProPerty.

11. ln K.Gopi's case (supra 1), the Hon'lcle Supreme Court held as under: I 'The registering officer is not concerned with tll, by the executant. He has no adjudicatory poue: whether the executant has any title. Even if arL executes a sale deed or a lease irl respect of a land ir which he has no title, the registering ofhcer cannr register the document if all the procedural com1,l made and the necessary stanp duty as well as r charges/fee are paid. We may note here that under t of the 1908 Act, it is not the function of the Sub i Registering Authority to ascertain whether the ventl to the property which he is seeking to transfer. registering authority is satisfred that the par i document are present before him and the par execution thereof before him, subject to making compliarces as narrated above, the documen registered. The execution arrd registration of a docu the -effect of transferring only those rights, if arl executant possesses. If the executant has no ri6} interest in the property, the registered document ca title held to clecide executant respect of refuse to ances are :gistration re scheme )gistrar or r has title Once the s to the ies admit rrocedura-l must be nent have that the :, title, or rnot effect any transfer. ] L2. The above said Judgment would squar( V apply to the instalt case as the respondent No.3 refuse(l to register the 7 document presented by the petitioner on the ground of discrepancy in title. In view of the same, the impugned refusa-l order No.9O|2O23/RO(OB) dated 1O.O5.2O23 is liable to be set

13. In the light of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed of by setting aside the impugned refusal order No.90 12O23/RO(OB) dated 10.05.2023 and directing the respondent authorities to register and release the document bearing No.P.254/2O23 presented by the petitioner, subject to the petitioner complying with the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 as well as the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. It will be open to the Registering Authority to refuse the dcjcument presented by the petitioner, if there are any objections, by duly assigning reasons in support of such decision and communicate the same to the petitioner thereon. This Court not given any finding with regard to the title of the subject property. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaleous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, I shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.P. PONNA KRISH SISTANT REGI SECTION OFFICER

1. The Principal Secretary, Stamps and (Registration) of Telangana Secretariat Buildings S tate of Telanga 2. The District Registrar, Registration a artment Government at Hyderabad nd Stamps Department, Ranga Reddy District To l I SA BS \ District. Hyderabad. [OUT]

3. The Joint Sub Reoistrar-|, office of the Sub Registrar, I .O., Ranga Reddy 4. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the St rte of Telangana at ! 9ne CC to SRt N MANOHAR, Advocate tOpUCl 6. Two CD Copies a HIGH COURT t I DATED:1911212025 ORDER WP.No.21684 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. Fr, Ib t '[ H; t\ iA cp (lt O / .rAlt i0?6 i \i '\) :\ <\ Ir .) I I I