Can Cancel Unofficial Registered Deeds: Telangana High Court

Hyderabad:Justice K. Sarath of the Telangana High Court made it clear that registration authorities have no power to unilaterally cancel sale deeds that were registered earlier, without issuing notice to the parties or in the absence of government orders.

The court noted that cancelling registered documents without any order from the competent authority for prohibition on registration of such properties under Section 22-A of the Registration Act was illegal and arbitrary and contrary to Rules 26 (i) (k) and 243 of the Telangana Rules under the Registration Act. The court specified that if the registration authority failed to perform the statutory duties in the manner prescribed by the law, especially in cancelling registered deeds, then the High Court under Article 226 could intervene in the issue.

The court said that one could not take the stand that only civil courts have exclusive domain to declare that a document of sale deed is null and void. When the registering authority does not perform statutory duties in the manner prescribed by law, the High Court can exercise its jurisdiction.

Justice K. Sarath set aside the cancellation of 17 sale deeds by the Shamshabad sub-registrar with regarding to land admeasuring 38 acres in Survey No.s 38, 54, 55 and 56 at Bahadurguda, Shamshabad mandal, based on a letter addressed by the Rangareddy district collector. The cancelled sale deeds were executed between private parties in 2007 and were cancelled a decade later based on the collector`s letter without the sub-registrar informing the concerned parties or an order from the government or court orders.

P. Shashidhar Reddy, counsel for the petitioner, argued that as per law that if the government authorities were under the misconceived impression that the registered sale deed of the petitioner was not valid, they could explore legal remedies but not indulged in unilateral cancellation of the validly executed registered sale deeds.

Shashidhar Reddy also brought to the notice of the court that the registration authorities were allowing for about 148 acres in the name of Dream India and others in the same survey numbers and had exercised selective cancellation of sale deeds of the petitioners.

Tekuru Swetcha, assistant government pleader for revenue, submitted that as per the entries in the revenue records i.e. pahanies of Bahadurguda, there were 76 survey numbers in the village comprising an area of 1,212.26 acres recorded as patta lands, except the land specifically situated in Survey No.s 28 and 62 admeasuring 150 acres and 500 acres respectively. A resurvey was conducted by dividing the entire extent of land into 101 survey numbers comprising 1,321.19 acres while showing that the land in Sy No.s 28 and 62 as government owned. All the remaining parcels/survey numbers were clearly classified as patta lands and the petitioners were claiming land situated in the said survey numbers.

The judge noted that no orders had been passed by the government placing the land in the prohibited list. Hence, the unilateral cancellation of sale deeds was arbitrary. Justice Sarath made clear that this order did not preclude the government or the district collector to take appropriate steps as warranted by law and to assert its title. If any proceedings, suit or appeal was pending between the executants of the documents, the government or any other interested property, the registered documents would be subject to them.