Dabbiru Muralidhar Rao v. The Joint Sub-Registrar, Stamps And Registration,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * * WRIT PETITION No.1425 of 2016 BETWEEN Dabbiru Muralidhar Rao.

... PETITIONER AND The Joint Sub-Registrar, Stamps & Registration, Shamirpet, Rangareddy District and others.

...RESPONDENTS DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 21.01.2016 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR 1.

Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments?

No 2.

Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

No 3.

Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment?

No

ORDER:

Petitioner complained to the first respondent under his representation dated 12.06.2015 that document No.1398 of 2015 is fraudulently registered through his office and hence, requested for cancellation of the document as well as appropriate action under Section 82 of the Registration Act. Alleging that no action is taken by the first respondent on the said representation, the present writ petition is filed.

2. I have heard Mr. Nandigam Krishna Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. I, however, do not see any power of respondents 1 to 3 either suo motu or on their own to cancel the document, which is already registered. Hence, to that extent, I am not inclined to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. However, to the extent of the allegation of fraudulent and bogus transaction, as alleged by the petitioner in the said complaint, is concerned, it is for the first respondent to verify and if satisfied, take appropriate action under Sections 82 and 83 of the Registration Act. The writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to examine the representation of the petitioner dated 12.06.2015 in terms of Sections 82 and 83 of the Registration Act and take appropriate decision in the matter expeditiously. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

______________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J January 21, 2016 DSK