Smt. Patlannagari Suguna, Alias Sugunamma v. The State Of Telangana And 4 Others

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.13658 OF 2019 Date:31.07.2019 Between:

Smt. Patlannagari Suguna, Alias Sugunamma, W/o. Sri P. Ananth Reddy, aged about 59 Years, R/o.H.No.2-78, Chanuvelli Village, Chevella Taluk, Ranga Reddy District .. Petitioner And The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents The Court made the following:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.13658 OF 2019 ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue.

2.

The Survey of India, Staff Cooperative Housing Society Limited, Uppal, Ranga Reddy District, sold house Plot No.329 admeasuring 300 sq. yards and deed of sale was registered on 03.09.1982. The Society unilaterally cancelled the deed of sale which was registered on 31.08.1996. This Writ Petition is filed challenging the action of the respondent - Society in unilaterally cancelling the sale deed on 31.08.1996 without notice and opportunity to the petitioner.

3.

From the facts briefly noted above, it is apparent that against the unilateral cancellation of earlier registered sale deed made on 31.08.1996, a Writ Petition is instituted in the year 2019 and that too after more than 22 years.

4.

Though learned counsel for the petitioner sought to contend that according to Rule 26 (k) (i) of the Registration Rules framed under the Registration Act and as per the principle laid down in Tota Ganga Laxmi v. Government of Andhra Pradesh1 the issue for consideration in this Writ Petition is, inordinate delay and laches in challenging the alleged unilateral cancellation of sale deed which is of the year 1996, even assuming that such cancellation was without any opportunity and without knowledge 1 (2010) 15 SCC 207

to the petitioner. The earlier sale was cancelled by the housing society. For the reasons best known to the petitioner, he kept quiet and pleads ignorance of such transaction. Therefore, the Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition. 5.

The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ___________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J Date:31.07.2019 KH