IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
AMIT SHARMA
Universal Promoters & Developers – Appellant
Versus
Government Of Nct Delhi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition filed under article 226 for quashing the cancellation of registration. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments presented by petitioners regarding jurisdiction of registrar. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 21) |
| 3. respondents argue about authority of the registrar regarding partnership registration. (Para 16 , 20 , 23 , 25) |
| 4. court's observation on powers of the registrar and procedural aspects. (Para 30 , 32 , 39) |
| 5. final judgment restored registration; annulled previous orders. (Para 51 , 52) |
JUDGMENT :
AMIT SHARMA, J.
1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, has been filed seeking the following prayers: -
“It is, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to: -
a) Call for the record of the case;
b) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned illegal orders dated17/02/2014 and 5/1/2015 respectively;
c) Issue a writ of mandamus. directing the respondents to restore and revive the Certificate of Registration of Firm "M/s Universal Promoters and Developers" of the petitioners;
d) Issue any other appropriate writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court which may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the


Common Cause (A Registered Society) v. Union of India
Sharad Vasant Kotak v. Ramniklal Mohanlal Chawda
Durga Prasad Sarawagi v. Registrar of Firms, West Bengal
Sri Lakha Granites v. Eklavya Singh and Ors.
Areness Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
Indian National Congress v. Institute of Social Welfare and Ors.
Dwarika Prasad Agarwal & Brothers v. Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits
S.P Chengalvarya Naidu v. Jagannath
Indian Bank v. Satyam Fibres (India) (P) Ltd.
Chen Khoi Kui v. Liang Miao Sheng
The Deputy Commissioner acted without jurisdiction in cancelling the firm registration, lacking authority to review under the Indian Partnership Act, rendering the action void.
The Registration Act does not empower registrars to cancel documents, which must instead be challenged in civil court for allegations of fraud.
Section 77-A of the Registration Act is unconstitutional for excessive delegation of powers to cancel registered documents, violating principles of judicial independence and due process.
A vendor cannot unilaterally cancel a registered sale deed as it conflicts with property law principles; disputes must be resolved in civil court.
A writ petition is not maintainable to challenge the registration of a cancellation deed executed unilaterally by the settlor of a settlement deed. The proper remedy for the aggrieved party is to fil....
(1) Cancellation of sale-deed – Registrar has no power to cancel registered sale deed and State Government cannot by an executive order, confer such a power on Registrar.(2) Annulment of registration....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.