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

WRIT PETITION No.41413 of 2016 &

WRIT PETITION No.41437 of 2016 Between:

Ediga Chandrasekar Gowd and another …Petitioners AND

1. The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Stamps and Registration) Department and others …Respondents COMMON ORDER PRONOUNCED ON: 31.07.2025 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 : Yes/No judgment may be marked to Law Reports/Journals

3. Whether Their : Yes/No Lordship/Ladyship wish to see the fair copy of judgment ______________________

JUSTICE K.SARATH THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH +WRIT PETITION Nos.41413 and 41437 of 2016 %Dated 31.07.2025 # Ediga Chandrasekar Gowd and another …Petitioners and

1. $ The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Stamps and Registration) Department and others …Respondents ! Counsel for Petitioners : Sri Vedula Srinivas, Learned Senior Counsel representing Ms. Vedula Chitralekha, learned Counsel for the petitioners in both the writ petitions ^ Counsel for Respondents : Smt. S. Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration in both the Writ Petitions ^ Counsel for Unofficial : Sri R.Anurag Respondents < GIST :

> HEAD NOTE :

? Cases referred :

1. 2017 (3) ALT 420 (S.B.), 2. AIR 1996 SCC 135, 3. (2022) 8 SCC 210, 4. (2022) 17 SCC 534.

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION Nos.41413 and 41437 OF 2016

COMMON ORDER:

Heard Sri Vedula Srinivas, learned Senior Counsel representing Ms. Vedula Chitralekha, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners in both writ petitions and Smt. S. Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration and Sri R.Anurag, learned Counsel appearing for contesting unofficial respondent i.e., Aurora Educational Society in both writ petitions.

2. Both matters are pertaining to same suit schedule property and the issue also is one and the same. In view of the same, both the Writ Petitions are being disposed of way of this common order.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are questioning the action of the respondent Nos.3 and 4 in processing and admitting to registration, the sale deeds in favour of the contesting respondents in Document Nos.3862 of 2016 and 3864 of 2016, dated 18.07.2016 on the file of the Joint Sub-Registrar-I, R.O.(OB), Hyderabad.

4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners further submits that the respondent Nos.5 to 7 (and others) in W.P.No.41413 of 2016 and the respondent Nos.5 to 10 (and others) in W.P.No.41437 of 2016 have executed a registered Document No.1049 of 2007, dated 19.04.2008 which is an Agreement of Sale-cum-Irrevocable General Power of Attorney in relation to an extent of 8372.2 Square Yards of land situated in part of Sy.Nos.137/1 and 2, 138, 139 corresponding T.S.No.15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 30P of Amberpet, Hyderabad (for brevity “suit schedule property”) in favour of petitioners and another. The petitioners paid Rs.56,25,000/- to the executants. The total sale consideration was Rs.2.25 Crores. Though symbolic possession was shown to be delivered, as a matter of fact, physical possession has not been handed over to the petitioners and they have constrained to issue instructions to stop payment of the amounts due under the cheques that had been issued by them towards the balance sale consideration. Thereafter the vendors of the petitioners unilaterally cancelled the registered document that was executed on 19.04.2008 by registering a Cancellation Deed No.3247 of 2008, dated 23.12.2008. In view of the same, the petitioners approached this Court and filed writ petition and this Court passed interim order in W.P.M.P.No.31289 of 2009 in W.P.No.24073 of 2009 on 09.11.2009 directing the respondent No.2 therein not to entertain and admit to registration of any document relating to the suit sched