Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K.LAKSHMAN
Lingala Padma – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana, rep.by its Principal Secretary (Revenue), Govt. of Telangana – Respondent
COMMON ORDER
Heard Mr. N. Manohar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Muralidhar Reddy Katram, learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of the respondents.
2. All these writ petitions arise out of identical facts and impugn the same proceeding, i.e., Proceeding No. DCOKNR - F10CAH (1) /1/2020 - ESEC dated 12.05.2025 (hereinafter “impugned proceeding”) issued by respondent No.2 - District Collector, Karimnagar. As such, the writ petitions involve common issues to be adjudicated. Therefore, they were heard together and are being decided vide the present common order.
3. These writ petitions challenge the impugned proceeding, whereby respondent No.2 directed unilateral cancellation of registered sale deeds executed in favour of the petitioners, on the ground that the properties form part of the prohibited list maintained under Section 22A of the Telangana Registration Act , 1908 (hereinafter “the Act, 1908”).
Brief Facts
4. Before adverting to the facts of the case, this Court would like to highlight that the lands of all the petitioners herein fall in Survey Nos.197 and 198 of Kothapalli Village & Mandal, Karimnagar District. As will be demonstrated infra, the
Unilateral cancellation of registered sale deeds without compliance to legal procedures and principles of natural justice is invalid.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the refusal for registration of properties based on defective notifications under Section 22-A of the Registration Act was illegal, arbitrary,....
The court ruled that land cannot be classified as prohibited under Section 22-A without proper Gazette notification, allowing registration of sale deeds.
The court established that proper notifications and adherence to guidelines are essential for enforcing prohibitions on property registration under Section 22(A) of the Registration Act.
The doctrine of res judicata applies to writ petitions, preventing re-litigation of issues already decided, thereby ensuring finality in judicial decisions.
The constitutionality of Section 22A of the Registration Act, 1908 was upheld, establishing that legislative provisions to prevent fraudulent transfers are valid and necessary for public policy prote....
The court ruled that the inclusion of petitioners' land in the prohibition register was erroneous and directed rectification based on prior judicial decisions.
The government does not have the power to entertain a review application unless there is a provision for review under the statute.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
