The High Court · 2025

Petition Under Article 226 of lhe 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, in the. nature of writ of certiorari by calling for the records relating to and in connection with the Refusal order of the 4th Respondent bearing intimation of refusal order communicated through vide refusal order No. 679125 Dt. 12-08-2025 refusing to registrar.the sale deed viz pending Document No. 679 of 2025, executed on 30- 06-2025, and presented on 19-07 -2025, relating to Property bearing Gram Panchayat No. 14-45111215, lying and forming part of Sy No. 1047lE, admeasuring and comprising on an area of 2541 Sq- Yrds or equivalent to 2124.53 Sq. lr/trs, (lncluding Private Common Passage Area), Situated at Ameenpur Village, Amee puram and patancheruvu as said property) for the pur Mandal and gram panchayat, presen y under R.C. of circle of GHMC' Sanga Reddy District (Herein ca,ed l#,lj: ffi r:r' il:ffii :"ff : :: ;x *:i;, *fi * l: j ff i: r further direct the 4th Respondent to register rno ,",utt't"ional ,rj,:r; j;:","d o n 3 0- 06_2 02 5 a n d p resen ", .", ;_'r:r:::r'.":il;i":",.T: "j and consequenry " l.A.NO :1 OF 202s petition Under Se th e a rr d a v t,,,"0,. ., o'r'l"J :: lrffi :l, T ] I ;,:"":,::il lil r: J:::j ,: direct the 4th Respondent to register and rerease the pending Document No. 67g ol 2025, executed on 30_06-2025 and presented on 1e-07'2025 bv suspending the Rerusar order No ur",rir'ir ;; ::"::::"t Gram panchayat N: ,'ilrii.';rir' ,i,rii'-l,il';"i1,:j":::.,1o1,oo",.trou,,.ino admeasuring and comprising on an area of ,r.l"J';r;J y "[ri,::11: 2124 53 sq. Mtrs' (lncruding private common passage Area), situated ar Ameenpur Vifiage' Arneenpur Mandar and gram panchayat, presentry under R.c. Puram and Patancheruvu of Circle of GHMC, Sanga Reddy District, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner : SRI PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL counsel for the Respondents : SMT S.SRAVANTHI, AGp FoR REVENUE The Court at the stage of admission made the fo owing ORDER , / THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K'SARATH w PETITI ON No.27400 of 2O25 ORDER: Heard earned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. S.Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader forStampsandRegistrationappearinglorthe respondents and perused the entire material on record' With their consent, this writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission' Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that 2. the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W'P'No'163 1O of 2Ol9 and batch dated ll'Ol'2}23 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. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for 3 Stamps and Registration has not disputed the I 2025 SCC OnLiue SC 74O !--- ,sK,J w.P.No.274OO ol2O2s submission made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner has not submitted the document before the respondents ald if he submits the document, they have to consider the same subject to r:ompliance of the provisions of the Registration Act, 19OB amd the Indian Stamp Act, 1g99. 4. The relevant portion of the order in W.P.No...631O of 20t9 and batch dated 11.01.2023 is as under

13. l'lre po(,er of the registcring authority to refusc regisLration is only, rf an_v of the grounds or objections that are enumerated undef the provisions of the Registration Act, lgog, and the Rules made thertunder in particular Sections 19,20,21,22_A, 34, 35 ancl rule 58 o[ the Telangana Rules under the Registration Act, 1908, are existing i. respect of any such document presented for the registration. Except, the grounds or objections that are enumerated under the lrovisrons of the Registration -Act, 190g, the regrsterrng authorities have no authority to refuse registration of a document on any other ground. As already noted above, the ground or.r which the impugnerl iefusal orders in all these batch of Writ petitions are passed is that thc link document shown in the respective documents is a validaled and an unregistered document. By looking into a validity ol t-re link document, the registering authority is lndirecth verifying \vhcther the executants of the respective documents are having valic title or not to execute the documents in question. As held in the above referred judgment in the case of Dr. yaclla Ramesh Naidu (1 supra), rhe registering authority is not entitled to go into the title of the p,lrties to the clocument. It is a settled law that the vendee under 4 d6gun-1gnt will not get a better title than his vendor and in i ! I I *.r.*".rrooo ,f iti!, " case i[ vendor iS not having a valid title over the property r,vhich is the subject matter of a parttcular document' the vendee under thc registration of such document will not have an effect on the property $'hich is the subject matter of the said document saiddocumentdoesnotgetanytitleoversuchpropertyandmere 14 As rightly conceded by the leamed 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 thcexecutantsoftherespectivedocumentisbaseduponthe validate<l document, though the same is compulsorily registerable document cannot be accepted an(l such a ground is not available to the registering authorities to refuse registration of a document on that ground' 19 tn the light of the above' this Court is unhesilant to hold that the respondent registering authorities are not cntitlcd to re[use registration of a document on the ground that the link document referred to in the respective document is a validated' docrrment or to refuse registration of such document by placrng reliance on endorsement, dated 02 01 2008' issued by the Commissioner and lnspector GeneraL of Stamps and Registration Accordingty' thc 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 returne:.,1:cu^ments and to process the same subject to the condition O: tn"^ complying with the provisions of the Registration Act' l9O8 and the Indian StamP Act' 1899' documents ^:tn 5 In K. Gopi's case (supra 1)' the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: "The registering ofltcer is not concerned with the title held br theexecutant.Hehasnoadjudicatorypowertodecidewhetherthe 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 olticer cannot refuse to register the document if all the 4 SI(,J W.P.No.274OO of 2O2S procedu-al compliances are made and the necessary stamp dut-y as well as registration charges/fee are paid. We may note here that under rl-e scheme of the lgog Act, it is not the functron of the Sub- ReElistrar or Registering Authority to ascertain rvhether the vendor has title to thc property which he is seeking to transfer. Once the registeri.g authority is satisfied that the parties to the document are present r:efore him and the parties admit execution thereof before him, sut-'ject to rnaking procedurar compriances as narrated above, the docutnent must be registered. The execution and registratlon of a documenl havc the effect of transferring only those rights, 1I any, that thc ,lxccutant possesses. [f the executant has no right, title, or interest ir the propert_\,, the registered document cannot effect anl lransfer. 6, In view of the order passed in W.p.No. 16310 of 2019 and batch dated ll.Ol.2023 and also the Judgment of the Hon1tle Supreme Court in K. Gopi,s case (supra 1) ald for the reasons mentioned therein, the Writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities to receive ancl register the sale deed presented by the petitioner rn respect of the subject plot without reference to the intimation of Refusal Order, dated 12.0g .2025 of the pending; Document No.p.679/2025 and. subject to condition o ! the said document complying with the provisions ol the Registration Act, 19Og a,d the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. There shall be no order as to costs. 7 5 sr('J W.P.No.274OO oJ 2O25 7, It4iscellaneous petitions' if any pending in this writ petition, shall stald closed' To 1 . The PrinciP //TRUE COPY// al Secretary, Stamps and Registration' S SD/-MOHD. ISMAIL PUTY REGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER tariat, State of Telangana at HYderabad

2. The Commisstone r and I nspector General, Stamps and Registration 4 q Dep artment, M.J.M arket, HYd erabad The District Collector, Sangareddy, D iskict SangareddY, T S The Sub-Registrar' Sub- Registrar Office , Patancheru (RO), Two CCs to GP FO R REVENUE, H igh Court for the State of Telangana at Hvderabad. [OUT] SangareddY, T.S 6 Ohe CC to SRI PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL' Advocate IOPUCI 7. Two CD CoPies SA B o HIGH COURT DATED:12 tO9t2O2S 22 stP l[[ ( i) o6.s,-, o,'r c HEq * ORDER WP.No.27400 of 2O2S DISPOSING OF THE W.P AT THE STAGE OF ADMISSION WTHOUT COSTS. ap, {