These writ petitions raise questions as to whether unilateral cancellation of Development Agreement-cum-General Power of Attorney (GPA) and registration thereof under the Registration Act, 1908 (for short "the Registration Act") are permissible in law.

2. The brief facts leading to the filing of this writ petition are stated hereunder:

The petitioners are owners of 11088 Sq.yards of land in Sy. Nos. 1 to 4 of Seetharampur Village, Thokatta, Secunderabad Cantonment. They entered into two Development Agreements-cum-GPAs dated 21.2.2005 and 23.11.2005 with respondent No. 3. Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 are the partners of respondent No. 3 firm. Under the said two documents, the petitioners entrusted the development of the extents admeasuring 2741 and 2128 Sq. yards, respectively, and respondent No. 3 has undertaken to construct independent deluxe duplex type of houses by investing its monies and in consideration thereof the petitioners agreed to share the constructed area in the ratio of 46%:54% between them respectively. The petitioners have also nominated respondent Nos. 4 and 5 as their GPAs to facilitate respondent No. 3 to deal with its share of 54% of the constructed houses. The petitioners alleged that subsequent to the execution of the two documents referred to above, respondent Nos. 4 and 5 have acted against the interests of the petitioners, forcing them to execute documents for cancelling the two registered documents. By separate, but identical orders passed on 23.6.2012, respondent No. 2 has refused to register the said two documents. Questioning the same, the petitioners filed the present writ petitions.

3. As the reasons for refusal to register the documents in both the cases are identical, it is sufficient if the refusal order in one case is reproduced, which is as under:

"This document styled as G.P.A. previously registered as Development Agreement-cum-GPA was kept pending for scrutiny after admission of execution by the executants.

As per C&IG (R&S), A.P., Hyderabad, vide Circular Memo No. G1/Can/4028/2010, dated 31.3.2010 G.P.A. refusal regn. Where the agent has himself an interest in the property which forms the subject-matter of the agency, the agency cannot, in absence of an express contract. Hence Section 202 of Indian Contract Act 1972 prevents termination of G.P.A. which involves the interest of the agent. No Registering Officer shall register a deed of Revocation/Cancellation of General Power of Attorney coupled with previously registered documents of agreements of sale to safeguard the interest of the agent/vendee. In case if any such deeds of Revocation/Cancellation of General Power of Attorney combined with agreement of sale/development agreement is presented for registration the Registering Officers are directed to refuse the document for registration."

Even though appeals lie to the District Registrar against the refusal orders under Section 72 of the Act, as the refusal is based on the circular issued by the superior authority, namely, Commissioner of Inspector General (Registration & Stamps), A.P., Hyderabad, the petitioners filed these writ petitions questioning the refusal orders as well as the circular memo dated 31.3.2012 which formed the basis for refusal of registration.

4. At the hearing, Sri Srinivas Polavarapu, learned Counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the impugned orders of refusal are unsustainable in law as the reasons on which the documents were refused to be registered are not envisaged by the provisions of the Registration Act. The learned Counsel further submitted that the reasoning of respondent No. 2 that the Development Agreements have created interest and therefore the same cannot be cancelled unilaterally, suffers from a patent error as the documents in question comprise two parts, namely, G.P.A. part and the Development Agreement part, which by themselves do not create any interest in respondent Nos. 3 to 5, that what is sought to be cancelled is the G.P.A. part of the docu