Conditional gifts must revert to donors if the specified purpose is not fulfilled, emphasizing government accountability.

ORDER :

T. Madhavi Devi, J.

In this Writ Petition, the petitioners are seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned refusal notice issued by the 3^rd respondent vide Sub-Registrar Kodad File No.278/2015 dt.02.03.2016 refusing to register the document of the petitioners dt.30.11.2015 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently to direct the respondents to receive and register the same in accordance with the provisions of the Registration Act and to pass such other order or orders.

2. Brief facts leading to the filing the present Writ Petition are that the petitioners have donated an extent of 800 square yards equivalent to 668.90 square metres of land situated in Survey No.365/E vide Khasra 824 (Minjumile) of Kudakuda Village and Gram Panchayat, Chivvemla Mandal, Nalgonda District within the jurisdiction of the Sub-Registrar, Suryapet vide registered gift deed bearing Document No.1770/1992 dt.03.04.1992 in favour of the Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by the Inspector General of Registration and Stamps, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad without any consideration for construction of Suryapet Sub-Registrar’s office. However, the respondents have not constructed the Sub-Registrar’s office in the donated land in spite of lapse of 24 years and it remained an open land and was subjected to various encroachments. In view thereof, on 30.11.2015, the petitioners made an application before the 3^rd respondent for cancellation of the gift deed dt.03.04.1992, but the 3^rd respondent issued the impugned refusal notice dt.02.03.2016 returning the gift cancellation deed. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that even as on date, the respondents have not constructed the Sub- Registrar’s Office in the subject land and it is lying vacant and since the gift was a conditional gift and since the condition has not been fulfilled, the respondents should be directed to return the land to the petitioners. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the condition mentioned in the gift deed and placed reliance upon the decision of this Court in the case of B.Prabhavathamma and others Vs. The Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Principal Secretary, Medical and Health Department and others, [W.P.No.3220 of 2014 dt.05.06.2023] and also the decision of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court in the case of M.Thiyagarajan Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department and others, [2017 SCC OnLine Mad 3742] and also the decision of Gauhati High Court in the case of Paschim Singicherra Gram Panchayat and another Vs. Sailendra Kumar Bhattacharjee and another, (2012) 4 Gauhati Law Reports 715 and the decision of Chhattisgarh High Court in the case of Sanjay Bajpal Vs. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Department of Revenue and others, [2015 SCC OnLine Chh 186] and the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of The Tahsildar, Pollachi Taluk, Pollachi, Coimbatore District and another Vs. P. Bagyalakshmi, [2017 SCC OnLine Mad 33945]. He submitted that in all these cases, the Courts have held that where the gift is conditional gift without any consideration and if the conditions are not fulfilled, then the donated land has to be returned to the original owner.

4. Learned Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration submitted that the Andhra Pradesh Rules under the Registration Act, 1908 and particularly Rule 26(i)(k)(i), which has been amended subsequently, provided that cancellation of registered deed can only be at the request of both the executants as well as the claimant and in this case, the petitioners cannot