THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed questioning the Memo in Rc.No.108 of 2024 dated 08.07.2024 issued by the respondent No.5 in refraining to cancel the cancellation documents bearing Nos.5511/2024, 5512/2024, 5513/2024 dated 18.06.2024 in pursuance of the order passed by the respondent No.3 in Appeal No.B/120/2024 dated 15.06.2024 as illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard Sri J. Ashwin Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt S. Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration for the respondent Nos.1 to 5 and Smt N.V.R. Rajya Laxmi, learned counsel for the respondent No.6.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.6, who is the mother of petitioner, has executed three Gift Deeds bearing Nos.1951/2022, 1952/2022 and 1953/2022 dated 03.03.2022 in favour of the petitioner and the scheduled property was delivered to her and she was in possession of the said property as absolute owner. The respondent No.6 at the behest of her son i.e., respondent No.7, filed application before the respondent No.4 for cancellation of Gift Deeds executed in favour of the petitioner and the respondent No.4 without proper appreciation of the facts has unilaterally issued proceedings for cancellation of the Gift Deeds. The petitioner filed appeal before the respondent No.3 and the respondent No.3 after examining the respondent No.6 and perusing the facts has set aside the order passed by the respondent No.4 vide Appeal No.B/120/2024 dated 15.06.2024. He submits that even after disposal of appeal before the respondent No.3, the respondent No.5 has accepted the cancellation deeds executed by the respondent No.6 and registered the cancellation of Gift Deeds. When the petitioner approached the respondent No.5 for setting aside the cancellation deeds as the orders of the respondent No.4 were set aside by the respondent No.3, the respondent No.5 has issued the impugned Memo in RC.No.108/2024 dated 08.07.2024 stating that he has no jurisdiction to cancel the registered cancellation deeds and he has not acted in pursuance of the orders passed by the respondent No.3.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that once the order passed by the respondent No.4 was set aside by the respondent No.3, the registration of the cancellation deeds are not permissible and the respondent No.5 without issuing any notice to the petitioner has registered the cancellation deeds, which is illegal and arbitrary and requested to direct the respondent No.5 to cancel the cancellation deeds by allowing the writ petition.

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner relied on the following Judgments;

1. H. Deepika vs. Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Appellate Tribunal

2. Matangi Premalatha vs. State of Telangana2

6. Learned Counsel for the respondent No.6 basing on the counter submits that the respondent No.6 has executed three gift deeds in favour of the petitioner on misrepresentation that those documents are for getting senior citizen pension and her photo and signature/thumb impression are mandatory for getting senior citizen pension and as she was taking care such as medication, maintenance, love and affection etc. After execution of those deeds, the petitioner stopped looking after the respondent No.6 and necked her out of her house. Thereafter, the respondent No.7 being the son of the

1 2022 SCC OnLine TS 654

2 2023 SCC OnLine TS 397

respondent No.6 has enquired about execution of documents in the office of Sub-Registrar and then, the respondent No.6 filed petition for cancellation of gift deeds executed in favour of the petitioner before the respondent No.4. She submits that the respondent No.4 after issuing notice to all the parties and after hearing both sides, cancelled the gift deeds vide Proc.No.C/256/2024 dated 18.04.2024, against which the petitioner filed appeal and the same was allowed vide Appeal No.B/120/2024 dated 15.06.2024 by setting aside the order passed