Sved Mohammed Arif v. 1. The State of Telangana

6. The Sub-Registrar, Choutuppal Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri 7. The Tahsildar, Choutuppal Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District 8. Laoooni Srinivasulu Goud, S/o. Yellaiah, Aged about 50 Years' Occ- -' -Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri euiinlss,-R/o. Panthangi Village, Choutuppal District.

9. Pillallamarri Madhusudha, S/o. Maraiah, Aged about 54 Years, Occ- - gusi;ess, Ryo. eantfrangi Choutuppal-Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri 'Village, District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ol the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos.6 and 7 in entertaining the registrations on the land of the Petitioner to an extent of 1,211 Sq. Yards in Suryey No.164/Uu which is situated Choutuppal Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District by rt Lakkaram Village, colluding with the Respondent Nos.8 and 9 and causing damage to the Petitior ::r is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of Articles 14, 15,21 and 301 lndia and also violation of Principles of Natural Justice ar r the Respondent Nos.6 and 7 not to entertain the regist process from the purchasers of the Respondent Nos.8 an,l Petitioner to anextent o'( 1,211 Sq. Yards, in Survey No.16,t. at Lakkaram Village, Choutuppal Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanar; -A of Constitution of consequently direct ation documentation 9 on the land of the .Ju, which is situated -i District fA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the c r the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cour direct the Respondent Nos.6 and 7 not to entertain the regir;l process from the purchasers of the Respondent Nos.8 anrl Petitioner to an extent ol 1,211 Sq. Yards, in Survey No.16,t at Lakkaram Village, Choutuppal Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvan disposal of the Writ Petition tiumstances stated in may be pleased to .ation documentation I on the land of the lJu, which is situated rgiri District pending Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI R. ABHINAV, COUNSEL RE PRESENTING FOR SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 7: Ms. DARA HARIIt A KIRAN, AGP FOR STAMPS AND REGISTRATION Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.8 & 9: -- The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI WRIT PETITION No.32(X)2 0F 2025 ORDER: This writ petition is liled with the following prayer: "...to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring t}.e action of the Respondent Nos.6 and 7 in entertaining the registrations on the land of the petitioner to an extent of l,2ll Sq.Yards in Survey No.l64/Uu which is situated at t€kkaram Village, Choutuppal Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District by colluding with the Respondent Nos.S and 9 and causing damage to the PetiLioner is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of Articles L4, 15, 21 and 3O0-A of Constitution of India and also violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the Respondent Nos.6 and 7 not to entertain the registration documentation process from the purchasers of the Respondent Nos.8 and 9 on the land of the Petitioner to a-Il extent of l,2ll Sq.yards, in Survey No. 164lUu, which is situated at I-akkaram Village, Choutuppal Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District and pass ..."

2. Heard Mr. R.Abhinav, learned counsel representing Mr. Rapolu Bhaskar, Iearned counsel for petitioner and Ms. Dara Haritha Kiran, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue artd Stamps & Registration for official respondents.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that respondent Nos.8 and t have trespassed into the lald of petitioner, created plots and are trying to alienate the same Hence, registration of the said plots be stopped. As per the Registration Act, the properti:s placed under the prohibited list \\ I 2 IAK,J can only be prohibited from registration. The H", b1"T;"2:";""y: tn K.hpi v. Sub-Registrqr and othersl, held as ollows: "15.The registering ollicer is not concernec title held by tJ:e executant. He has no adjudicatr to decide whether the executant has any Litle. I executart executes a sale deed or a lease in res land in respect of which he has no title, the lr officer cannot refuse to register t]le document procedural compliances are made and the r starnp duty as well as registration charges/fee We may note here that under the scheme of t.}.e it is not the function of the Sub-Registra.r or F ( Authority to ascertain whether the vendor has ti property'which he is seeking to transfer. ( registenng authority is satisfied that the part ( document are present before him and the par :i execution thereof before him, subject tc procedural compliances as narrated above, thc : must be registered. The execution and registr I document have the effect of transferring o .t rights, if any, that the executant possess€s executant has no right, title, or interest in the thc registered document cannot effect arry transft ,,vith the ry power .'en if an :lect of a gistering f al1 the ecessary re paid. lO8 Act, gistering le to the :rce the s to the 's admit making ,cument ion of a y those If the )roperty, ta,'

4. lcarned counsel is unable to demorr rtrate whether properties are categorized under any of the p,r ohibited list(s), except for self serving statements in the writ affi c avit, nothing is placed on record. In view of the szrme, no fu;- her orders are required to be passed at this juncture. Learn,:d counsel for petitioner seeks permission of this Court to wit .rdraw the writ petition with a liberty to file fresh writ petition, 1l is Court is not inclined to grant liberty in the facts and circu I stances of the r2025 SCC OnLire SC 740 ,-''' ,/i 5 JAK,J w_32092_2025 With the above observalions, Writ Petition is dismissed as 3 withdrawn. No costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. To, SD/: S.MALLIKARJUNA SISTANT RE //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

1. One CC to SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR, Advocate 2. Two GCs to GP FOR ST State of Telangana. [OUT] AMPS AND REGIST PU I ON, High Court for the

3. Two CD Copies PVL GJP JkP HIGH COURT DATED:251'1012025 ORDER WP.No.32092 of 2025 IHl: i ( ) 'f. ) ?, * 1 6 8 2tilti * SI1\ DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS J?S*l*