Sri Eraoadindla Balakrishna' S/o. Eragadindla Venkanna' Aged abo-ut 45 Years' v. 'I The State of Telangana

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constiiution 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 ofCertioraribycallingfortherecordsrelatingtoandinconnectionwiththe Refusalorderofthe4thRespondentbearingintimationofrefusalorder communicated through vide refusal order No OB1l25 Dl 12-08-2025 refusing to registrar the sale deed viz pending Document No 681 of 2O25 ' executed on 30- 06-2025, and presented on 19-07 -2025, relating to Property bearing Gram Panchayat No. 14-4511t2t6, lying and forming part of Sy No lO4TlA' admeasuring and comprising on an area of 2541 Sq Yrds or equivalent to 2124.53 Sq. Mtrs, (lncluding Private Common Passage Area)' Situated at Ameenpur Village, Ameenpur Mandal and gram Panchayat' presently under R C' 7 Puram and Patancheruvu of circre of GHMC, sanga Reddy District (Herein cared as said property) for the reasons based on varidated document viorating section 17 0f registration Act for being iregar, arbitrary, viorative of provisions of the registration Act, 1909, discriminatory and u nconstitutiona I and consequently further direct the 4th Respondent to register and release the Do 2025, executed on 30-06_2025 and presented on 19_Ol_2025 sale deed. cument No. 68'l of purported to be a l.A.NO: 1 0F 2025 Petition Under section 15i cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the 4th Respondent to register and rerease the pending Document No. 6g1 of 2025, executecl on 30-06_2025 and presented on 19-Ol_2025 by suspending the Refusar order No 68112025, Dt 12-08-2025, with respect to property bearing Gram Panchayat No. 14_4511t216, lying and forming part of Sy. No. 1047tA, admeasuring and comprising on an area of 2541 sq. yrds or equivarent to 2124'53 Sq Mtr";, (rncrudrng private common passage Area), situated at Ameenpur Village, Ameenpur Mandal and gram panchayat, presenfly under R.C. Puram and patan:heruvu 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 following ORDER THE HON'BLE SRT JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.274OL of 2o25 ORDER: Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and Smt. S.Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader lor 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 petitioner 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 ll.Ol-2o23 and also the recent Judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in K' Gopi Vs' The Sub-Registrarl 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 OnLine Sc 74O *.r.*".zzoot q i{ils - submissicn made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner has not submitted the document before the respondents and if he submits the document, they have to consider the same subject to compliance of the provisions of the Registration

4. Act, 19OB and the Indian Stamp Act, 1g99. 'l'he relevart portion of the order in W.P.No.163 1O of 2019 and batch dated 11.01.2023 is as under:

13. The power of the registering authority to re[use registratlon is only, if any of the grounds or objcctions that are enumeratcd under the provisions of the Registration Act, l9Og, .ind the Rules made thereunder in particular Sections 19, 20, 21 , 22 A, 34, 35 arLd rule 58 of the Telangana Rules under the Registration Act, 190g, arc existing in respect of an] such document presented for the registration. Except, the grounds or obJections that are enumerated unrler th,: provisions of the Resistration Act, l9Og, the registering authorities have no authoritv to refuse registration of a document on any other ground. As alread_r. noted above, the ground on which the impugnec refusal orders in all these batch of Writ petitions are passed is that the link document shou.n in the respective documents is a valiclatcd and an unrcgistcred document. 81, looking into a validity ol the link document, the registering allthorit-v rs indirecfly verifying whether the executants of thc respective documents are having valid title or not to excclltc the documcnts in question. As held in th: above referred judgment in the case of Dr. \,adla Ramesh Naidu (l supra), the registering authorit\.is not entitled to go into the title of the parties to the documenr. It is a settled law that the vendee under a dccument will not get a better title than his vendor and in v 3 SK,J W-P.No.27407 oJ 2O25 case if vendor is not having a valid title over the property which is the subject matter o[ a particular document, the vendee under the said document does not get any tltle over such property and mere registration of such document ra,ill not have an effect on the property which is the subjcct matter of the said document.

14. As rightll' conceded b_y 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 thc registering authorities to refrrse registration of a document on that ground.

19. In the light of thc above, this Court is unhesitant to hold that the respondent rcgrstcrlng authorities are not entitled to refuse registration of a docurnent on the ground that the link document referred to in the respectivc document is a validated document or to re[use 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 ordcrs in the respective Writ Petitions are set aside and Writ Petrtions arc alloued u'ith a further direction to the respondent registering authorities to receive the returned documents and to process the same sllbject to the condition of the said documents complying with the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. 5 In K. Gopi's case (supra 1), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: "The registering officcr is not concerned with the title held by the executant. [{e 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 o[ a land in respect of which he has no title, the registering ofllcer calrnot rcfuse to register the document if alt the 4 SI(,J W.P.No.27401 of 2O25 =- procedural compliances are madc and the neccssa{ stamp duty as ivell as registration charges/fee are paicl. We ma1. note here that under the scheme of the 1908 Act, it is not the function of the Sub_ Registrar or Registering Authorit], to asccrtain $hethcr the !,endor has titl€ to the property which hc is seeking to tratrsfer. Once the registering authority is satisfied that the parrres to t]re document arc present before him and the parties admit cxecution thereof before him, su:ject to making procedural complianccs as narrated above, the docL ment must be registered. The execution and registration of a document have the effect of transferring onlj those rights, if any, that the executant possesses. If the executant has no right, title, 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 2Ol9 and batch dated I I .O I .2023 and also the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. Gopi,s case (supra 1) and for the reasons mentioned therein, the Writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities to receive and register the sale deed presented by the petitioner in respect of the subject plot without reference to the intimation of Refusal Order, dated 12.08.2025 of the pending Document No.P.68 I/2025 and subject to condition of the said document complying with the provisions of the Registration Act, 19OB and the Indial Stamp Act, 1899. There shall be no order as to costs. 5 SI(,J W.P.No.274O1 oJ 2O2S

7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed. To I l //TRUE COPY// SD/-MOHD. ISMAIL PUry REGISTRAR ECTION OFFIC ER \ cretariat, State of

1. The Princlpal Secretary' Stamps and Registration' 2 4 5 Telangana at HYderabad The Commtssloner ano I nspector General, Stamps and Registration Deoartment. M.J.Market, Hyderabad' fi$;iil C;ii""ioi, si ngit"ddv, District sangareddv' T'S i;; fi,[-[Ltisi#, sro- n"t"toi'oni.", Pataricheru ( Ro)'. sansareddv'.r's i;;"cA b 6C Fon nrvEiruE nign court for the State of relansana at Hvderabad. [OUT] o iji,!"cdi" s'nr CAwnN KUMAR AGARWAL' Advocate [oPUC] 7. Two CD CoPies SA BS o , :.: HIGH COURT DATED:12 tO9l2O2S /2 ,l l1\.- \-'.\ r4- 22 PSE ). M '). D6, t,,. . - _.r' ORDER WP.No.27401 of ZOZI DISPOSING OF TFIE W.P AT THE STAGE OF ADMISSION WITHOUT COSTS. q9w q ?K_ {