The High Court · 2025

Judgment

5. l!9 Slafe of Telangana, Rep by its.principat Secretary Rep by its Revenue uepartment, Secretariat Hyderabad The District Collector, Medchal- Malkajgiri District Hyderabad The Commissioner Stamps and Registrar, Nampally, Hyderabad The District Registrar, Medchal- Malkajgiri District The Sub Registrar, Ghatkesar, Medchal- Malkajgiri District ...RESPONDENTS 'cJurt Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit flled therewith, the High may be pleased to issue an order Direction or writ more particularly oie in the nature of writ of certiorari by calling for the records relating to and in connection with the Refusal order of the 5th Respondents bearin! intimation of refusar order communicated through vide retter No. 195/202s,-dated: 11-08-2025 refusing to resistrar the sare deed vide p. No. p-119t2o2s, J"t.J, 1i-o;;6r;,'[r"iiit. open plot in survey no. 347.admea_suring .l 17 Sq. VarOs, oi gZai 'aq."'il,u., situated at Aushapur Viilage, Under Ghatklsar Municiparity, Ghatkeshar Mandar, Medchal-Matkajgiri District (Erstwhire Aushapur Gram panchavui, irung.'R;oov District), Under sRo Ghatkeshar, and Bounded by, North. House of Bramaramba, South. i00 Feet Wide Road, East. House of VisnwanaOnam,-W""1. i"LO i, Survey no 347 (Herein calred as said property) being iilegar, ,roiirriv, ,rol]iul or provisions of the registration Act, 190g, discriminatory and unconsiitutional and consequently further direct the 4th and 5th Respondent to register and release the document purported to be a sale deed relating to open plot in survey no. 347 admeasuring 117 Sq. Yards, or 97.81 Sq. Mtrs, situated at Aushapur Village, Under Ghatkesar Municipality, Ghatkeshar Mandal, Medchal- Malkajgiri District [Erstwhile Aushapur Gram Panchayat, Ranga Reddy District], Under SRo Ghatkeshar, and Bounded by, North: House of Bramaramba, South: 100 Feet Wide Road, East: House of Vishwanadham, West: Land in Survey no 347. lA NO: 1 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 document purported to be a sale deed relating to open plot in survey no.347 admeasuring 117 Sq. Yards, or 97.81 Sq. Mtrs, situated at Aushapur Village, Under Ghatkesar Municipality, Ghatkeshar [Vlandal, Medcha]-tt/alkajgiri District [Erstwhile Aushapur Gram Panchayat, Ranga Reddy Districtl, Under SRO Ghatkeshar, and Bounded by, North: House of Bramaramba, south: 100 Feet wide Road, East: House of vishwanadham, west: Land in Survey no 347, pending disposal of the writ. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI N. ANI RUDH counsel for the Respondents: sMT. s. SRAVANTHI, ASST. Gp FoR srAMps & REGISTRATION The Court made the following: ORDER i I I i IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K'SARATH 3 5 1 Between: Sri Oval Das Narsing and another' ...Petitioners And I. The State of Telangana'^rep' by its Principal Secretary' Revenue Department, S".I.,"ii"i, Hyderabad' and 4 others. ...ResPondents' ORDER: HeardSriAnirudhNellikonda,learnedCounselforthe petitionersandSmt.S.Sravanthi,learnedAssistantGovernment pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing for the respondentsandperusedthematerialonrecord.withtheir consent,thisWritPetitionisdisposedofatthestageof admission itself 2 petitioners i,io,".lffi: 1r: .,. fired the present writ petition questioning the action No.S in refusing to register the sale deed dated 11.08.2025 of the respondent Document p'No.p-11 g/2025 Lr.No. tg|/2025 dated 1 1.O8. 2O2S sy'No.347 admeasuring l n aor*" through respect of plot in ffildff Ghatkeshar Mandar, Medchar-Malkajgiri j.lHr Gram Panchavat' District erstwhile Ranga Reddv District as ilregar and 3. Learned Counsel for the petifioners further submits that the impugned Refusal Order No. 195 of 2o2idated ll.Og.2O2S passed by respondent No.5 is based on the instructions issued and Inspector Generar of Registration and Stamps, Telangana utd.e Memo No.G2/2ST dated 26.0g.2020, wherein it was mentioned as under: r...o,r;;::i;1;:{:;'::L;';:111-;:;;;:,,,:,.:n" by the commissioner *TlLe p/ots /2O1g i 3 sK,J 1V.P.No.247St of 2O2S The ownership is supported by the registered rink documents making uand ana buifut titte. The property described tn the current d.ocumeni d.o"" not satisfy etther of these criteria. It racks both the required rayout approuar and ang reference to registered. link document that could establish the chatn of tilte.,, 4' Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the reasons mentioned in the present writ petition with regard to the link documents were arready considered by this court in w'P'No'8556 of 2o2s on ro.o4.2o2s directing the respondent authorities therein to receive and register the sare deed presented by the petitioners therein in respect of the subject plots without reference to the letter dated 2g.tI.2oo6issued by respondent No'2 therein with regard to ref,sar of registration. 5' Learned counser for the petitioners further submits that, as per G.o.Ms.No.2B, Development (plg.lII) Department, dated 2O.O2.2O25, paragraph No.3 of the Amendments, it is stated that any unregistered plots which are forming part of an unautho rized, Iayout wherein 1,,y" of prots were already sord through Municipal Administration;a Urban : 4 sK,J W.P.No.2473L of 2025 registered sale deed on or before 26.08.2020, irrespective of whether such owrrers have applied under LRS-2020 or not, sha1l be permitted for registration with the competent Sub-Registrar, duly collecting the layout regularization charges and pro-rata open space charges as mandated. The details of such plots shall be collected in the prescribed format by the sub-registrar and transmitted to the LRS portal for processing under these rules. In spite of that the registering authority, without collecting the requisite layout regularizatton charges and pro-rata open space charges' passed the refusal order' Therefore,learnedCounselhasrequestedtoallor,vthewrit petitionbyd'irectingtherespondentauthoritiestoreceiveand registerthesubjectdocumentP.No.P-1|912025 datedll.08.2025andreleasetheSameinpursuanceofthe Administration and Urban , dated 2O'O2'2O25 issued bY MuniciPal G.O.Ms.No.28, Development (Ptg'III) Department the Government of Telangana'

6.ontheotherhand,learnedAssistantGovernmentPleader for stamps and Registradon has not clisputed the submissions / J 5 sK,J 1V.P.No.24731 of 2o25 made by the learned Counsel for the petitioners with regard to the disposal of W.P.No.8556 of 2025 dated 10.04.2025 and submitted that the petitioners, without making any application for the layout regularization (LRS-202O) as per G.O.Ms.No.28, Municipal Administration and urban Development (plg.lu) Department, dated 2o.o2.2o25, approached the respondent authorities for registration of the pending document, as such, the respondent authorities have rejected the document presented by the petitioners. However, if the petitioners come forward to pay the requisite fee as per the rules contemplated in the aforesaid G.O., the respondent authorities will consider the same and pass orders as per law and requested to pass appropriate orders.

7. After hearing both sides and on perusing the entire material on record, this court is of the considered view that the objections raised by the registering authority with regard to Iinked documents were considered by this court in w.P.No.8556 of 2025 and passed orders on ro.o4.2o2s and the relevant portion of the said order reads as under: : I i i I I 6 SK,J W.P.No.24ZOL of 2O2S "4'The relevant portion of the order in w.p.No.16310 of 2or9 and batch dated i 1.01 .2023 is as under: 13' The power of the registering authority to refuse registration is g.ly, if any of the grounds or objections that are enumerated under the provisions of trre nelistration Act, 1908, and the Rules made ihereunder in particular Sections L9,20, 21, 22-A,34, 35 and rule 5g ol the Tellngana Rules under the Registration Act, 190g, .." .*i.tirrg-i., respect of any such document presented for tr," ."gi"-t.?tion. Except, the grounds or objeclions that .." ..rr*rated under the provisions of the Registration Act, 1g0g, the registering authorities have no authority to refuse registration of a document on any other g.orrri. As already noted above, the ground on which the impugned refusal o.a.." in all these batch of writ petitions ,.L pi"""d is that the link document shown in the respective documents is a validated and an unregistered document. By l0.king into a varidity of the rink document, the registering authoity is inJir;;tly verifying whether the executants of the respective documents are having valid title or not to execute the documents in question. As herd in the above referred;"agm"r-,t in the case of Dr. yadla Ramesh Naidu (1 ",rp.u)l- tf," registering authoritv is not-entitled to go into trrc titre of the parties to the document. It is a settrJd rr*, that rhe vendee under a document will not get a better titre than his vendor and in case if vendor is not having a varid title over the property which is the subject mattei of a particular document, the vendee under the said document does g.i.r-,y title over such. property and mere registration or suci document wilr not have an .lf:"} on the properry which is the subject matter of the said document. 14. As rightly conceded by the learned Government Pleader for Stamos registering authorities .are not entitled tJ refuse registration of a document on mere ground that the title of the executants of the respective document is based upon the varidated document, though the same is compursorily registerable document cannot be accepted and such a jround is not available to the registering authorities to .erure registration of a document on that ground. "lg Registration, the "o, - 19' In the light of the above, this court is unhesitant to hold that the respondent registering authorities are not .:i :#.iiAt',^1"... ' | - -jid{" ;*1;}:. i.::.,--.. 7 SK,J W.P.No.2473t of 2O2S entitled to refuse registration of a document on the ground that the rink document referred to in the respective document is a validated document or to refuse registration of such document by pracing ..r-"".';;'endorsement, dated 02'o1'2009, issuea uy the commissioner and Inspector General of Stamps and Registratiorr. A""o.dingly, the impugned orders in the respectiv- writ petitions are set aside and writ petitions are ailowed with * ir.trr.. direction to the respondent registering authorities to receive the ' returned documents and to process the same subject to the condition of the said documents comprying with the provisions of ^the Registration Act, 1g0g'ana the Indian Stamp Act, 1g99." 5' In K' Gopi's case (supra r), the Hon,bre Supreme court held as under: "The registering <;fficer is not concerned with the titre held by the executant. He 'has no adjudicatory power to decide whether - the .xecutarlt has an.y title. Even if an executant executes a sale deed or a lease i, ,espect of a land in respect of which he has no titte, irre registering officer cannot refuse to register the document if all the procedural compliances are-made and the .r""..""., stamp duty as welr as registration charges /fee are paid. we ma.y note here that under the scheme of the lgoa Act, it is not the function of the Sub-Rcgistrar or Registering Authoritv to ascertain whether the vendor has title to the property which he is sdeking to transfer. once.the registering authority is satisfied that the parties to the documen, ur. Jr."ent before him and the parties admit execution thereof before him, sub'iect to making procedurar compliances as narrated above, the document must be registered. The execution and registration of a document have the effect-oi^i.rrr"ferring only those rights, if any, that the executant possesses. If the execurant has no right, title, or intcrest i" ,fr.-pioperty, the registered document cannot effect any transfer. 8' In view of the submissions made on either side and by following the orders passed by this court in w.p.No.BS56 of )OZS dated IO.O4.2O2S and G.O.Ms.No.28, Municipa_l \ I I I I I I , i 8 SKrJ W.P.No.2473L of 2o25 Administration and Urban Development (Plg.lll) Department, dated 20.O2.2O25, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities to receive and register the subject document No.P.1 19 of 2025 dated 1 1.08.2025 presented by the petitioners in respect of the subject property without reference to the Refusal Letter No. 19512025 dated 1 1.O8.2O25 issued by the respondent No.S subject to condition that the petitioners have to pay the requisite charges as per G.O.Ms.No.28, Municipal Administration and Urban Development (Plg.lII) Department, dated 20.O2.2025 and compiying with the provisions of the Registration Act, 19OB and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The respondent authorities are at liberty to pass appropriate orders, if they have any objection, by duly assigning reasons in sup.port of such decision and communicate the said decision to the petitioners. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed. any opinion on merits of the case as to the entitlement of the petitioners to get the subject document registered. There shall be no order as to costs' / 9 w.p.No.24z31 of ;J:J petitions, if any pending in this Writ

9. Miscellaneous Petition, shall stand closed. SD/.P.PONNA KRISHN ASSISTANT //TRUE COPYII OFFICER To,

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. B. TKS W r--, -t, HIGH COURT DATED i0411212025 ORDER WP.No .24731 of 2025 ir- o :'--- 'IiiE g 14 l 15 EET W f,l I- ? ',,i a :.. D4r'Crif:!) '+ DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION uirrHouT GosTs \"