THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.23331 of 2013

O R D E R

When the matter was called on 12.12.2024 and again on

30.01.2025 and 30.10.2025, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Heard learned Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3. Despite issuance of notice to respondent Nos.4 and 5 through paper publication, none appeared on their behalf.

2. The present Writ Petition is filed challenging the action of the 3^rd respondent i.e. the Sub-Registrar, Sanga Reddy, Medak District, in entertaining and registering cancellation of Irrevocable General Power of Attorney (IGPA) dated 26.07.2013 vide Doc.No.53/IV/2013, as illegal, arbitrary, in violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the Circular Memo No.G.1/Can/4028/2010 dated 31.03.2010 issued by the 2^nd respondent and also provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and a consequential direction to declare the deed of Cancellation of IGPA dated 26.07.2013 vide Doc.No.53/IV/2013, as null and void and set aside the same.

3. The brief facts of the case as per the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition are that respondent Nos.4 and 5 are the absolute owners and possessors of land in Survey No.313 admeasuring 1000 square yards out of total area of 1255 square yards situated at Rajampet Village, Sanga Reddy Town and Mandal, Medak District; that they have given the said land for development to the petitioner; and that pursuant thereto, they had executed a registered IGPA dated 18.10.1999 vide Document No.30 of 1999, authorizing the petitioner to enter into agreement of sale, receive sale consideration and to execute sale deeds in respect of the developed flats in the subject land.

4. It is further stated in the affidavit that after execution of IGPA, the petitioner had developed the subject property by making huge investments and raised multi-storied building in the name and style of “M/s.Chandra Towers” comprising of more than 50 flats; that only 14 flats, out of 50 flats, were not sold, and in respect of the said 14 flats, the petitioner had executed agreement of sale in favour of one Mukund Das Soni; and as the said Mukund Das Soni failed to comply with the terms of agreement, the petitioner could not execute the registered sale deed; that the said Mukund Das Soni instituted a suit, vide O.S.No.58 of 2009 on the file of the learned Family Court-cum-VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Medak at Sanga Reddy, seeking specific performance of agreement of sale in respect of the above said 14 flats; and that the petitioner had settled the dispute with Mukund Das Soni in respect of the unsold flats and agreed to register sale deeds in his favour. While so, respondent Nos.4 and 5 had executed a cancellation of IGPA dated 26.07.2013 unilaterally cancelling the registered IGPA dated 18.10.1999 without issuing notice to the petitioner, which action of the 3^rd respondent in entertaining and registering cancellation of IGPA dated 26.07.2013, is illegal and arbitrary. Hence, this Writ Petition.

5. The 3^rd respondent filed counter-affidavit on behalf of the official respondents, stating that respondent Nos.4 and 5 had executed a cancellation of IGPA on 26.07.2013 revoking the GPA previously registered as Document No.30 of 1999 in favour of the petitioner and got the same registered as Document No.53/IV/2013 at Sub-Registrar’s Office, Sanga Reddy, since there is no prohibition against its registration.

6. While denying the averments made by the petitioner in the affidavit, it is further stated in the counter-affidavit that the Revocation of GPA was registered on 26.07.2013 by following the instructions of Commissioner and Inspector General of Registration and Stamps, vide Memo No.Rc.No.G1/10547/2008 dated 18.07.2008, wherein it was stated that documents of revocations other than sales and conveyance such as deeds of Agreement of Sale-cum-GPA, Development of Agreement-cum-GPA, Partition