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

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR Writ Petition No.25872 OF 2013 DATE: 08.01.2026 Between:

Kummitha Balreddy and another.

AND …Petitioners The State of Andhra Pradesh represented by is Principal Secretary, and 3 others …Respondents

ORDER

Heard Sri P.Achutham Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

2. The Writ Petition is filed challenging the action of respondent No.3 in entertaining and registering unilaterally cancellation Deed of Agreement of Sale - cum - Irrevocable General Power of Attorney dated 05.10.2009, as illegal, arbitrary and sought a consequential direction to set aside the same.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the 4^th respondent had sold the subject property in favour of the petitioners and executed Deeds of Agreement of Sale - cum - Irrevocable General Power of Attorney With Possession dated 08.07.2009, and the same was accepted by the petitioners and possession was also delivered to them. While so, the 4^th respondent, behind the back of the petitioners, approached the 3^rd respondent for cancellation of the subject document and the 3^rd respondent without any notice to the petitioners and without concerning the provisions of the Registration Act, registered, and thereby, cancelled the Deeds of Agreement of Sale - cum - Irrevocable General Power of Attorney dated 08.07.2009 unilaterally. 4. It is settled proposition of law by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Satya Pal Anand v/s. State of Madhya Pradesh and others, (2016) 10 SCC 767 that the power to register a document of cancellation cannot be construed to confer a quasi-judicial power on the registering authority, and it is only when a sale deed is cancelled by a competent Court, the cancellation deed can be registered and that too, after notice to the parties concerned, and that the Rules make clear that both cancellation deed as well as registration were wholly void and non-est in the eye of law.

5. In this regard, it is appropriate to extract Rule 26(i)(k)(i) of the Rules hereunder:

“26(i) (k) (i) The registering officer shall ensure at the time of preparation for registration of cancellation deeds of previously

registered deed of conveyances on sale before him that such cancellation deeds are executed by all the executant and claimant parties to the previously registered conveyance on sale and that such cancellation deed is accompanied by a declaration showing natural consent or orders of a competent Civil or High Court or State or Central Government annulling the transaction contained in the previously registered deed of conveyance on sale:

Provided that the registering officer shall dispense with the execution of cancellation deeds by executant and claimant parties to the previously registered deeds of conveyances on sale before him if the cancellation deed is executed by a Civil Judge or a government officer competent to execute government orders declaring the properties contained in the previously registered conveyance on sale to be government or assigned or endowment lands or properties not registerable by any provision of law.”

6. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Thota Ganga Laxmi and another v/s. State of Andhra Pradesh and others, (2010) 15 SCC 207, held that it is only when a sale deed is cancelled by a competent Court that cancellation deed can be registered and that too after notice to the parties concerned.

7. Admittedly, respondent No.3 should have ensured that cancellation deed is executed by both the executants and claimant parties to the previously registered conveyance, accompanied by a declaration showing mutual consent, whereas in the absence of the same, respondent No.3 has no power to

register the unilaterally cancelled Deeds of Agreement of Sale - cum - Irrevocable General Power of Attorney. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate, to meet the ends of justice,