SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Telangana) 310

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR, J.
Smt. Avula Ratna Kumari - Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Telangana - Respondent
Writ Petition No.14186 of 2024
Decided On : 07-06-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ravinder Reddy Muppu
For the Respondent: GP For Revenue.

IMPORTANT POINT
Section 22A(1)(e) of the Registration Act applies only to properties with accrued government interests, which was not applicable in this case.

Headnote:

Prohibition - Writ Petition - Registration Act - Section 22A(1)(e) - The court interpreted Section 22A(1)(e) of the Registration Act, emphasizing that the prohibition on registration applies only to properties with accrued interests of the government or institutions, which was not applicable in this case.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought to declare the non-notification of certain registered documents as null and void under Section 22A(1)(e) of the Registration Act, following an arbitration award that cancelled a development agreement.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the cancellation of the development agreement did not invoke the provisions of Section 22A(1)(e) as the petitioner misconceived its applicability, and the award was not challenged properly.

Issues: Whether the respondent authorities were obligated to notify the registered documents as null and void under Section 22A(1)(e) of the Registration Act following the arbitration award.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that Section 22A(1)(e) applies only to properties with existing government interests, which was not the case here, and the petitioner failed to follow proper legal procedures.

Result: The writ petition was dismissed.

ORDER :

(N.V. Shravan Kumar, J.) :

This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:

“to declare the action of the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 in not notifying the Registered Sale Deed Dated 27.08.2020 bearing Document No.3845 of 2020, Registered Sale Deed Dated 15.06.2019 bearing Document No.4574 of 2019, Registered Mortgaged Deed Dated 15.10.2018 bearing Document No.8057 of 2018 and Registered Mortgaged Deed Dated 25.02.2020 bearing Document No.1371 of 2020 under Prohibition as null and void pursuant to the Award Dated 01.03.2024 in Arbitration Case No. 06 of 2023 on the file of Hon’ble Arbitral Tribunal, Sri Justice C.Praveen Kumar (Retd), at Hyderabad, as arbitrary, illegal and against to Section 22 A(1)(e) of the Registration Act and consequently to direct the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 to notify the said documents under Prohibition as null and void in respect of subject property.”

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had purchased the residential premise bearing H.No.40-384/1/5 part, admeasuring 398 Sq yds, in plot No.351/A part, in Sy.No.361/1, 316/2, 368/1, Jawahar Nagar Co-operative Society Limited, Moula-ali, Hyderabad, through registered sale deed dated 04.08.2018. Thereafter, the petitioner for development of the subject property vide Document No.6243 of 2018 dated 08.08.2018, entered into Development Agreement cum General Power of Attorney with M/s.Ajay Vamsi Infratech Private Limited. However, when the construction was not completed in a prescribed period, petitioner thereafter filed Arbitration case No.135 of 2021 and the Hon’ble Court vide order dated 28.03.2023, was pleased to appoint Sri.Justice C.Praveen Kumar (Retd) as sole arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the parties. Thereafter, the sole arbitrator in Arbitration Case No.6 of 2023 was pleased to pass award dated 01.03.2024, wherein it was held that ‘the development agreement-cum-GPA(DAGPA) dated 08.08.2018 is cancelled and in view of cancellation of the said DAGPA, all agreements/deeds executed pursuant thereto gets nullified and the claimant was entitled to proceed further in accordance with law’.

3. Subsequent to the Award dated 01.03.2024, the petitioner on 11.03.2024 made a representation and requested respondent Nos.2 and 3 to notify the development agreement-cum-GPA (DAGPA) dated 08.08.2018 as null and void under prohibition. However, when the same was kept pending, the petitioner on 20.04.2024, made another representation and requested respondent Nos.2 and 3, to notify the registered sale deeds bearing Document Nos.3845 of 2020 dated 27.08.2020, 4574 of 2019 dated 15.06.2019, 8057 of 2018 dated 15.10.2018 and 1371 of 2020 dated 25.02.2020 as null and void under prohibition. However, the respondent Nos.2 and 3 informed the petitioner that the award dated 01.03.2024 is not a Civil Court judgment and insisted the petitioner to provide a copy of judgment from the Civil Court. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed the writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Award dated 01.03.2024 is not challenged by the parties therein, and further has drawn attention of this Court to the Section 22 A(1) (e) which reads as under:-

“any document or class of documents pertaining to the properties the State Government may, by notification prohibit the registration in which avowed or accrued interests of Central and State Governments, Local Bodies, Educational, Cultural, Religious and Charitable Institutions, those attached by Civil, Criminal, Revenue Courts and Direct and Indirect Tax Laws and others which are likely to adversely affect those interests”.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per Section 22A(1) (e), the respondent authorities are bound to notify the subject documents as null and void as prohibited for registration and pray this Court to direct the respondent authorities to notify the said documents under Prohibition as null and void.

6. Heard and perused the material available on record.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top