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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 17507

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K. SARATH, J
Nimmaneni Srinivasa Rao – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP/8397/2025



IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD *****

WRIT PETITION NO.8397 of 2025 Between:

Nimmaneni Srinivasa Rao …Petitioner AND

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Stamps and Registration) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and six others …Respondents JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON: 29.07.2025 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH

1. Whether Reporters of Local : Yes/No newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment ?

2. Whether the copies of judgment : Yes/No may be marked to Law Reports/Journals

3. Whether Their Lordship/Ladyship : Yes/No wish to see the fair copy of judgment _____________________ JUSTICE K.SARATH THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH + WRIT PETITION NO.8397 of 2025 %Dated 29.07.2025 # Nimmaneni Srinivasa Rao …Petitioner and

1. $ The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Stamps and Registration) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and six others …Respondents ! Counsel for Petitioner : Sri E.Madan Mohan Rao Learned Senior Counsel appearing for N.Hari Prasad, Learned Counsel for the petitioner ^ Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : Mrs.S.Sravanthi Learned Assistant Govt. Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 Counsel for respondent Nos.4 to 7 : Sri Avinash Desai, Learned Senior Counsel, appearing Sri T.P.S.Harsha, < GIST :

> HEAD NOTE : ? Cases referred :

2 (2010) 4 SCC 728

3, [1.(2011) 7 SCC 69] MANU/AP/0709/2017 4 MANU/TL/1298/2023

5 (1969) 2 SCC 343

6 (2016) 10 SCC 767

7 2024 SCC Online SC 2490 8 2024 SCC ONLINE TS 4119

9 (2012) 1 SCC 656

10 2023 SCC ONLINE 1266

11 (2021) 19 SCC 263

12 Unreported judgment of this court in

FCA NO.75 OF 2022 DT.27.01.2023

13 MANU/MH/1136/2025

14 1950 SCC Online MAD 153

15 (2004) 8 SCC 785

16 2025 SCC Online 740

17 (2006) 4 SCC 322 18 (2014) 4 SCC 108

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.8397 of 2025

ORDER:

1. This Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent No.3 in registering the Deed of Cancellation bearing document No.2115/2022, dated 17.03.2022 whereunder Registered Agreement of Sale- cum-General Power of Attorney (for short ‘AGPA’) bearing document No.12902/2019 dated 18.10.2019 was cancelled without any enquiry by exceeding his authority and jurisdiction and consequently sought a direction to the respondent authorities to cancel the Deed of Cancellation bearing Doc.No.2115/2022 dated

17.03.2022.

2. Heard Sri E.Madan Mohan Rao, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri N.Hari Prasad, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mrs. S.Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the official respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri Avinash Desai, learned Counsel representing Sri T.P.S.Harsha, learned Counsel for the respondent No.4 and perused the record.

3. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the husband of the respondent No.5 namely P.Ravindra Babu, who was engaged in real estate business under the name and style of Bhoomi Projects, Ameerpet, Hyderbad, had purchased the land in Sy.Nos.25, 33, 37, 39, 40 and 41 situated at Immulnarva village, Kothur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District from its lawful owner i.e. the respondent No.4 by virtue of registered Agreement of sale-cum-GPA bearing No.12902/2019 dated 18.10.2019 (for short ‘AGPA’) and later the said land was converted into 100 House Plots. Subsequently, the husband of the respondent No.5 offered to sell the entire 100 house plots and accordingly, the petitioner purchased said plots and paid a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- towards part sale consideration i.e. Rs.17,00,000/- by way of cash and Rs.13,00,000/- through RTGS in favour of M/s Siri Bhoomi Projects on 19.09.2020 and the possession was also delivered to the petitioner. At the time of receiving the part sale consideration, the husband of the respondent No.5 agreed to execute the registered sale deed in favour of the petitioner or his nominees. Unfortunately, the said Ravinder Babu expired, leaving behind him, the respondent No.5 and his two minor sons. Consequent on death of his vend

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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top