AI Overview...
-
Rule 26(i) and Proviso - Registration Act, 1908
The proviso to Rule 26(i) of the Andhra Pradesh Registration Rules clarifies the conditions under which certain registration actions, such as cancellation or revocation of deeds, are permissible. Several cases highlight that registration authorities cannot unilaterally cancel or revoke deeds like gift or sale deeds without following due procedure, and the proviso provides specific procedural safeguards. For example, in INDAP00000037591 and INDAP00000037609, courts emphasized that unilateral cancellation without proper process is invalid, and the proviso limits the authority's power to act arbitrarily.
KHANDAVALLI NAGALAKSHMI KUMARI vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH - Andhra Pradesh, Siva Malikarjuna Rao Vs The State - Andhra Pradesh -
Applicability to Gift and Sale Deeds
The applicability of Rule 26(i)(k)(i) to gift deeds and sale deeds has been scrutinized, with courts ruling that registration or revocation actions must adhere to the provisions of the rule and its proviso. Registration of revocation deeds found to be contrary to the rule's provisions was declared illegal, underscoring the importance of procedural compliance.
Janupala Vijay Kumar Reddy, Hyderabad VS State of A. P. , Revenue, Hyd. - Andhra Pradesh -
Unilateral Cancellation under Rule 26(i)(k)(i)
Courts have examined whether authorities can unilaterally cancel deeds under the proviso to Rule 26(i)(k)(i). The consensus is that such unilateral actions are not permissible without following due process, and any such cancellation needs to be supported by proper legal procedures.
Siva Malikarjuna Rao Vs The State - Andhra Pradesh -
Registration and Original Documents - Rule 55-A(i)
Under Rule 55-A(i) of the Registration Rules, the absence of original documents does not automatically bar registration if the petitioner can provide certified copies or other satisfactory proof. Courts have held that non-production of original deeds is not an absolute ground for rejection, emphasizing flexibility in registration procedures provided the legal requirements are met.
Venugopal vs The Inspector General of Registration - Madras, Venugopal VS Inspector General of Registration - Madras -
Legal Limitations and Procedural Safeguards
The overarching principle from these sources is that registration authorities must adhere to procedural rules, including the proviso in Rule 26(i), and cannot act arbitrarily. Proper legal procedures and safeguards are essential to uphold the legality of registration, cancellation, or revocation actions.
Multiple sources including INDAP00000037591, Siva Malikarjuna Rao Vs The State - Andhra Pradesh
Analysis and Conclusion:
The proviso to Rule 26(i) of the Andhra Pradesh Registration Rules imposes procedural limitations on the powers of registration authorities, especially concerning the cancellation and revocation of deeds. Authorities cannot unilaterally or arbitrarily cancel registrations without following prescribed procedures. Courts have consistently emphasized the importance of procedural compliance, the admissibility of certified copies in registration, and the need for safeguards to prevent misuse of power. These principles ensure that registration acts are carried out lawfully and fairly, respecting the rights of the parties involved.
Search Results for "Proviso to Rule 26 i K i of Ap Registration Rules"
2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 1341 • India - High Court of Andhra Pradesh
R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, JJ
Rules Registration - Rule 26(i) - Registration Act, 1908 - Cancellation of Deed of Gift - The court held that the registered Deed ... The learned Government Pleader, in support of the appellant would draw the attention of this Court to Rule 26 (i) and proviso thereto and A.P Rules Registration made under provisions of the Registration Act 1908. The said Rule reads as follows:- “#....
2017 0 Supreme(AP) 404 • India - Andhra Pradesh
P.NAVEEN RAO
12 - Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling On Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 - Section 9 - Specific Relief Act - Section 31 - Registration ... Act, 1908 - Section 69 - Specific Relief Act - Section 31,17,21 and 22 - Petitioners challenge the registration of deed of cancellationby ... of sale deed - Once the deed is presented for registration and complies all requirements registering authority has no competence ... Proviso appended to Rule 26(i)(k)(i) of the Rules, 19....
2022 0 Supreme(AP) 19 • India - Andhra Pradesh
M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
are declared as illegal and registration of revocation deeds is contrary to Rule 26(i)(k)(i) of Registration Rules. ... 26 (i)(k)(i) of Andhra Pradesh Registration Rules made under Registration Act, 1908 are applicable to gift deeds or not. ... Constitution of India, 1950– Article 226 - Andhra Pradesh Registration Rules made under Registration Act ... Rule #HL_S....
2023 Supreme(Online)(AP) 23263 • India - High Court of Andhra Pradesh
V.SUJATHA
REGISTRATION ACT - CANCELLATION OF DEED - UNILATERAL CANCELLATION - [Rule 26(i)(k)(i) of the Registration Rules] - Unilateral ... Whether unilateral cancellation of sale deeds can be done by the authorities unilaterally under proviso to Rule 26(i)(k)(i) of the Rules or not can be examined in the writ petition. ... The Supreme Court, after referring to Rule 26(i)(k) of the Registration#HL....
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 56402 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J
The petitioner, a registered taxpayer, challenges the cancellation of registration under the CGST/KSGST Act, citing a failure to ... that returns were submitted within the allowable period post-cancellation and allows the petitioner to apply for revocation of registration ... inclined to show some indulgence, by permitting the petitioner to submit a fresh application for revocation of registration with an application to extend the period, as contemplated under the 1st proviso to Rule 23(1) of the CGST #....
1991 0 Supreme(Ker) 146 • India - Kerala
PAREED PILLAY
The court discussed the provisions of S.22, S.23, and S.24 of the Representation of the People Act, which empower the Electoral Registration ... Issues: The main issue was whether the Electoral Registration Officer could include the petitioners in the electoral roll ... Proviso to Rule 23 of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 envisages that no appraisal lie where the person desiring to appeal has not availed himself 'of his right to be heard by the registration....
1998 0 Supreme(Bom) 412 • India - Bombay
Maharashtra Technical Education Examination Board ... Ordinance No. 26 ... Pharmacy examination-Admitted in 2nd year under ATKT Rule-Held-Order XXVI of Ordinance not applicable-Admission to 2nd year cannot ... ... The proviso to Ordinance No. 26, as relied upon by the authorities is not applicable to students who were allowed to keep terms (ATKT) as per rules and were admitted to and were studying in the next academic year. ... ... 10.In the result, petition is partly allowed and the impugned order t....
2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 16681 • India - High Court of Madras
Honourable Mr Justice S.SOUNTHAR
Registration - Writ Petition - Registration Act, 1908 - Rule 55-A(i) - The court focused on the interpretation of Rule 55-A(i) ... He argued that the original document's absence should not bar registration. ... , emphasizing that non-production of original title deeds does not automatically preclude registration if the petitioner provides ... Per contra, Mr.M.Shahjahan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that in Federal Bank case referred supr....
2024 0 Supreme(Mad) 1299 • India - Madras
S. SOUNTHAR
Registration - Settlement Deed - Rule 55-A(i) of Registration Act, 1908 - The court interpreted Rule 55- ... Act and its rules. ... The petitioner presented a certified copy and argued that the original was not necessary for registration under the Registration ... Rule 55-A(i) of the rules framed under Registration Act, 1908. ... Per contra, Mr.M.Shahjahan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respo....
1992 0 Supreme(Mad) 262 • India - Madras
K.S.BAKTHAVATSALAM, D.RAJU
to rule 12(1) of the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957, was contrary to law. ... solely on the ground that they comprised more than one transaction exceeding the monetary limit of Rs. 5,000, as per the second proviso ... authority disallowed the claim for concessional amount in respect of turnover covered by sixteen C forms, totaling Rs. 1, 31, 467.26 ... As noticed supra, the rejection of the forms was only on the ground that it contravened the second proviso t....
Filter by Legal Phrase
