[\,4ohammed l\,4a sarathulla v. 1. State of Telangana

Petitron under Article 226 of the Constitutton of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Wnt of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3'd respondent in passing refusal order vide Lr.No.385/SRO/Shmbd/2025 dated.'16/09/2025 refusing to register the documents submitted by the petitioner for registration in respect of plot bearing No.335 admeasuring 266.66 Sq. yards, under Sy.No.657, in the layout approved plan of HUDA, vide No.6971lMP2lHUDAl84 dated.0210711987, situated at other than NH-7, Shamshabad Village and lt/andal, Ranga Reddy District, on the ground of validated document, is in total non application of mind, arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to settled principles of law laid down in the order passed in WP.No.'16310/2019 dated.l 1lO1l2O23 apart from violation of the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908, and set aside the same, and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 to register and release the pending document No.10212025 presented by the petitioner in respect of subject property, and to pass i { !l

1. lA NO: 1 OF 202s Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in thr: circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Or urt may be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 to register and release lhe pending document No.10212025 presented by the petitioner in respecl 1;f plot bearing No.335 admeasuring 266.66 Sq. yards, under Sy.No.657, in thr; layout approved plan of HUDA, vide No.6971ilr/P2lHUDA/84 dated.02.07.1987, :;ir :ated at other than NH- 7, Shamshabad Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy Distrr:1. by suspend ing refusal order vide Lr No.385/5 RO/Shmbd/2025 dated.16.09.2()21, pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRl. MOHD MOIN AHMED OUADRI Counsel for the Respondent's No's 1 TO 3: GP FOR STAI/IPS AND REGISTRATION The Court made the following: ORDER F i ( Frz :.::,.r l]:. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.28594 of 2025 ORDER: Heard Mr. Mohd Moin Ahmed Quadri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. S.Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing for the respondents. 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. 163i0 of 2Ol9 and batch dated 1L.O1.2O23 and also recent Judgment of the Honble Supreme CourL in K.Gopi Vs The Sub- Registrart and requested to pass similar order in this writ petltlon.

3. Learned Assistant Government Pieader for Stamps and Registration has not disputed the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner '2025 SCC Online SC 740 2

4. The relevant portion of the order in W.P.No.16310 of 2Ol9 and batch dated 1 1.01.2023 is as r.rnder:

13. The por\,cr of thc registering authority to refuse r. ltisitration is onl1', if any of thc grounds or objections that are enurirrr':rte(l under thc provisions of the Rcgistration Act, I908, and the Rulr.r. rrade thcrcundcr in par[icular Sections 19,20, 21.22 A, 3.1, 35 r,l rule a)8 of the Telangana Rules under the Registration Act, l9-ti. are exrslrng in respect of any such document prcscnted for the regist rrlion. Exccpt, the grounds or objectiolrs that are enumerated under t1( provisions of thc Registration Act, 19O8, the registcring authorities h,r,r' no authority to refuse registration of a document on any other grourrc .^s trlread,r noted abovc, thc ground on which the impugned refrrsal c rlcrs in all thcse batch of Wr rt Peti[ions are passed rs that the lrnk r:c rrrnent shorr:t ir.r thc respectl\,c documents is a validated and an unrcpr:itcred documerlt. By looking rnto a validity of the Iink document, the r,ri ,srerir.rg authoritl, is inclircctll, verifying whether the executants ( the respective documents are having valid title or not to execut€ h(' documents in question, As held in the above referred judgment in tfr(' ( ase of l)r. Yaclla Ramcsh Naidr-r (1 supra), the registering authority i:i rot entitled to go into the titlc of the parties to the document. tt is a s( tlcd lau, that the vendee under a document ll,ill not get a better title tL!rr his r.,cndor and in casc if venrlor is not having a valid title over the pr)l)cr ty rvhich is the subjcct mattcr of a particular document, the ven(t3 lrnder the said document does not get any title over such prc )('rty and merc registration of such document u,ill not have an effr'-- on thc propert) whtch is thc subject matter of the said document.

14. As righth conceded by the learned Government I','irder [or Starnps and Registration, the registcring authorities are no utitled 1o refuse registration o[ a document on mere ground thal rhe titlc of thc executants of the respective document is bascd rLpon the validated document, though the same is compulsorily regis,tl,rable document cannot be accepted and such a ground is not availab,t io the registering authorities lo refuse registration of a document on thzrt lround.

19. In the light of the above, this Court is unhcsrlrrr.rt to hold that the respondent registering authorities are not ,:r titled to refuse ! I I I I I I I I I I i i i I I i i I I =aaq 3 registration of a document on the ground that the link document referred to in the respective document is a validated document or to refuse registration of such document by placing reliance on endorsement, dated 02.0i.2008, issued by the Commissioner and Inspector General of Stamps and Registration. Accordingly, the impugned orders in the respective Writ Petitions are set aside and Writ Petitions are allowed with a further direction to the respondent regislering authorities to receive the rcturned documents and to process the same subject to the condition of the said documents complying with thc provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and the {ndian Stamp Act,

5. ln K.Gopi's case (supra 1), the Honble Supreme Court held as under: "Thc registering ofhcer is not concerned with the title hcld by the executant. He has no adjudicato11' power to decide whether the executant has any title. Even if an cxecutant executes a sale deed or a lcase in respect of a land in respect o[ which he has no title, the registering ofhcer cannot refuse to register the document if all the procedural compliances are made and the necessary stamp duty as well as registration charges/fee are paid. We may note here that under the scheme of the 1908 Act, it is not the function oI the Sub Registrar or Registering Authority to ascertain r,r,hether the vendor has title to the property which he is seeking to transfer. Once the registering authority is satisfred that the parties to the document are present before him and thc parties admit execution thereof before him, subject to making procedural compliances as narrated above, the document must be rcgistered. The execution and registration of a document have the effect of transferring only those rights, if any, that the executant possesses. [f the executant has no right, title, or interest in the property, the registered document cannot effect any transfer.

6. In view of the order in W.P.No. 163 i0 of 2Ol9 and batch dated 1I.O1.2O23 and also the Judgment of the Honble I I t t i h I 4 Supreme Court in K. Gopi's case (supr,r 1) and for the reasons mentioned therein, the Writ Petiti<;n is disposed of, directing the respondent authorities to re<:.rrve, register and release the sale deed dated 09.O9.2025 uft7,,, P.No.lO2/2025 presented by the petitioner in respect 'rl property, without reference to the Refi-r-;al Order dated the subject

16.09.2025, subject to condition of thc said document complying with the provisions under the J?cgistration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. 'Ihcre shall be no order as to costs.

7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pencli.'rg in this writ petition, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SI]/.K.BHAVANI SWAMY A'SSISTNruT REGISTRAR /^.Lv SECTION OFFICER ) To, 1 State of Telangana' rep by its Principal Secretary Re\/enue Department' 2 The District Registrar, Registration and Stamps Deparlment, Ro, Ranga Secretariat, HYderabad ReddY District. The Sub Regrstrar, Registration and Stamps Departrrent' SRO' Shamshabad' Ranga ReddY District'

4. One cc to SRI MOHD tuolN A{il\nED QUADRI Adr''rcate IOPUCI 5 Two CCs to GP FOR STAMPS AND REGISTRATIC \ 'High Court for the - State of Telangana [OUT] 6 Two CD CoPies M, .\- HIGH COURT DAf ED:2210912025 ORDER WP.No.28594 of 2025 \ \r * 2ttrPM SP471 ;rE.0 WRIT PETITION IS DISPOSED OF WITHOUT COST x( 1