IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR
V. Krupa Sagar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WP 20110/2011
##PAGE1##
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.20110 OF 2011
DATE: 31.12.2025
V.Krupa Sagar and another
…Petitioners
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh Represented
by its Commissioner Registration and Stamps
Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and two others.
…Respondents
ORDER
Heard Ms.Bhavana Sagar, learned counsel representing
Sri Srinivas Velagapudi, learned counsel for the petitioners, as well as
learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing respondent Nos.1
and 2 and Sri Deepak Mishra, learned counsel representing Sri Mayur
Mudra, learned counsel for respondent No.3. Perused the material
available on record.
2. The present writ petition has been filed assailing the action of
respondent No.2 in unilaterally cancelling the registered Gift Settlement
##PAGE2##2
Deed vide Doc.No.2165 of 2005, dated 07.07.2005 through
cancellation Deed of Gift Settlement vide Document No.0273 of 2007,
dated 03.02.2007 as illegal and to consequently set aside the same.
3. The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.3 is the elder
brother of the petitioner and, out of love and affection, respondent
No.3 executed an unconditional Gift Settlement Deed dated 07.07.2005
in petitioner’s favour, having registered the same in the office of
respondent No.2 vide No.2165 of 2005, transferring all rights, title, and
interest over the house bearing Nos.7-2-209/3 and 7-2-209/3/A,
admeasuring 72.00 sq. yards or 60.19 sq. meters, including the
common area of 20.00 sq. meters, situated at Ashok Colony, Sanath
Nagar, Hyderabad. The name of petitioner’s was mutated in Municipal
records. Subsequently, the respondent No.3 approached the
respondent No.2 seeking cancellation of the Gift Settlement which was
executed in favour of the petitioner, without informing the petitioner,
due to which, the respondent No.2 registered the cancellation deed of
the gift settlement dated 03.02.2007 without giving notice to the
affected parties. Therefore, it is contended that the proceedings of the
cancellation deed are contrary to law.
##PAGE3##3
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent No.3
contends that the petitioner is not looking after respondent No.3 and
that the respondent No.3 was subjected to physical and mental agony
and that there were certain disputes with respect to the Gift Settlement
Deed. Therefore, the representation made before the authority seeking
cancellation of the deed was legal.
5. I have given my earnest considerations and perused the record
under Section 26(i)(k)(i) of the A.P. Rules under the Registration Act,
which reads as under:
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 executants
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.”
##PAGE4##4
6. Admittedly, the respondents have not put on any notice.
Therefore, in view of the settled position of law as held by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the matter of Thota Ganga Laxmi V.
Government of Andhra Pradesh, 2010 15 SCC 207, that the
Sub-Registrar/respondent No.2 has no power to cancel the gift
settlement deed without followi
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.