SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 17962

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Pulla Karthik, J
M/s. Vishwakarma Infra – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WRIT PETITION No.13508 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: E. Akash Reddy
For the Respondents: S. Sravanthi

The Registering Authority is not entitled to adjudicate the title of the parties or refuse registration based on the absence of NALA conversion proceedings, provided that procedural requirements under the Registration Act and Stamp Act are fulfilled.

Headnote:(A) Registration of Documents - Refusal based on NALA conversion - Registering Authority cannot refuse to register a document solely on the ground of lack of NALA conversion proceedings; the tax can be demanded by appropriate authorities as and when required. (Para 10)

(B) Registering Authority - Scope of Power - Adjudication of Title - The Sub-Registrar has no adjudicatory power to decide whether the executant has a valid title; registration cannot be refused if procedural compliances are met and necessary stamp duty and fees are paid. (Para 11, 12)

Issues: Whether the Registering Authority can refuse registration of a sale deed based on the absence of NALA conversion proceedings, lack of new passbooks/title deeds, or lack of approved layout.

O R D E R :

With the consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for disposal at admission stage.

Aggrieved by the action of respondent No.3 in refusing to register and release the Sale Deed presented by the petitioner bearing Pending Document No.P.261/2026, dated 01.04.2026, and in issuing Refusal Order No.12 of 2026 dated 21.04.2026, the present Writ Petition is filed.

Heard Sri E. Akash Reddy, learned counsel representing Sri E. Akash Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. S. Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration, appearing for respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Nagula Venkataiah, Nagula Bhoopati and Nagula Ravinder Kumar, who were the absolute owner and possessors of land admeasuring Ac. 3.00 guntas in Sy.No.95/Part of Neknampur Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, executed Agreement of Sale-cum-General Power of Attorney to an extent of Ac. 2.00 guntas of the subject land in favour of V. Lakshmpathi Rao through Doc.No.1225 of 2000. The said GPA holder died on 18.01.2003 and one of the original owners, Nagula Venkataiah, died on 13.07.2018. Subsequently, Nagula Bhoopati and Nagula Ravinder Kumar represented by the LR’s of their GPA holder and consenting parties of Nagula Venataiah have offered to sell land admeasuring 5445 sq. yards in Sy.No.95/Part of Neknampur Village, Gandipet Mandal, to the petitioner for a valid consideration. Accordingly, a sale deed dated 01.04.2026 was executed and presented before respondent No.3 on 18.04.2026. However, respondent No.3 refused to register and release the same and inturn issued refusal order No.12 of 2026 dated 21.04.2026 and kept the document pending.

It is further submitted that in view of the order dated 11.01.2013 passed by this Court in W.P.No.16310 of 2019 & batch and also the recent decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in K.Gopi v. The Sub-Registrar112025 SCC OnLine SC 740, as well as the order dated 02.07.2024 in W.P.No.15471 of 2024, the reasons assigned in the impugned order cannot be sustained. Therefore, learned counsel contends that the impugned Refusal Order dated 21.04.2026 is liable to be set aside.

The above made submissions are not seriously disputed by the learned Government Pleader.

A perusal of the record reveals that the respondent authorities have refused for registration of the subject document on the following three grounds:

I. No Nala conversion proceedings from the Competent Authority as per the instruction of C&IG Memo No.G3/3247/2018, dated 01.05.2019 and also Pattedar Names (Vendor) and not reflecting in Bhoobharathi Web portal.

II. .No New Pass Books & Title Deed for establishing their ownership under 6 (D) of ROR Act .

III. The Scheduled land is not an approved layout from the competent authority.

Insofar as the objection taken by the Registering Authority with regard to NALA conversion proceedings is concerned, the said issue has already been dealt with by this Court in W.P.No.15471 of 2024, wherein, this Court has deprecated the practice of the Registering Authority in refusing the register the document without understanding the purport of the earlier orders of this Court. The Court has further observed that the Registering Authorities are unable to decipher the Court orders and also admonished the Sub-Registrars in insisting for Court orders on settled issues and disposed of the said writ petition with the following directions:

“19. With the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of directing the Registering Authority to receive, register and release the subject document, subject to the petitioner complying with the provisions of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, and Indian Stamps Act, 1899 , as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order without insisting for the proceedings of NALA Tax under the provisions of the Telangana Agricultural Land (Conversion for non agricult

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top