Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 271 (TS)

Y. Venkat Swamy v. State of Telangana

2025-04-08

K.SARATH

body2025
ORDER : (K. SARATH, J.) Since both these writ petitions arise out of the same suit schedule property, they are being disposed of by this common order. 2. In W.P.No.8508 of 2020, the petitioners are questioning the action of the respondent No.2 i.e, Sub- Registrar, in trying to register the document purported to be a will deed executed by Smt K. Pushpavathi by forging her signature in favour of the respondent Nos.4 and 5 without considering the representation dated 09.12.2019 as illegal and arbitrary. 3. In W.P.No.25229 of 2023, the petitioner is questioning the action of the respondent No.3 in issuing the order of Intimation of Refusal No.41/2023 dated 26.07.2023 in terms of Section 22(A) of Registration Act, 1980 in thereby refusing to register and release the pending registration of Document No.P.152/2023 dated 20.07.2023 pertaining to the petitoner’s property i.e., residential house No.03-180 (PTIN.1150200884) admeasuring 142.0 sq. yards or equivalent to 118.71 sq. mtrs with plinth area 455.0 sft covered under Block No.03 and Ward No.01 situated at Suraram Colony, Suraram Village, Qutubullapur Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Telangana State, on the ground of pendency of W.P.No.8508 of 2020 before this Court. 4. For the purpose of narrating the facts, W.P.No.25229 of 2003 is being taken as a lead case. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitoner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration and learned counsel for the respondent Nos.6 and 7. 6. Learned Counsel for the petitoner submits that the petitoner has purchased the property i.e., house bearing No.3-180 admeasuring 142.0 sq. yards or 118.71 sq. meters with plinth area of 310 sq. feet and 145 sq. feet (RCC) situated at Suraram Colony, Suraram Village, Qutubullapur Mandal and Municipality, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, from the respondent Nos.4 and 5 as they were declared as absolute owners of the said property through the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.304 of 2022 on the file of III Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-X Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Medchal, dated 29.11.2022 in their favour by virtue of will deed executed by Smt K. Pushpavathi on 22.06.2019. He further submits that the respondent Nos.4 and 5 have filed O.S.No.304 of 2019 on the file of Additional Junior Civil Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Medchal and subsequently it was transferred and renumbered as O.S.No.304 of 2022 on the file of II Junior Civil Judge at Medchal and the same was decreed in favour of the respondent Nos.4 and 5 on 29.11.2022. Thereafter, the petitoner has purchased the suit schedule property and paid advance amount to the respondent Nos.4 and 5 and executed the documents and approached the respondent No.3 by paying requisite fee for registration on 20.07.2023, and the same was given registration document No.P- 152/2023. Thereafter, the petitioner has received the letter of Intimation of Refusal No.41 of 2023 dated 26.07.2023 issued by the respondent No.3 on the ground that W.P.No.8508 of 2020 is pending before this Court with regard to the same suit schedule property. 7. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the impugned order passed by the respondent No.3 is contrary to Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1980 as it was issued in view of pendency of W.P.No.8508 of 2020 and without application of mind and void in law and requested to set aside the impugned refusal order by directing the respondent No.3 to register and release the pending registration of document of the petitoner. 8. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied on the following Judgment:- 1. Kunchanapalli Mysooraiah vs. Sub-Registrar, 2005(5) ALT 616 9. Learned Counsel for the respondent Nos.6 and 7 submits that the respondent No.3 has rightly passed the impugned refusal order for registration of the document in view of pendency of W.P.No.8508 of 2020 filed by the respondent Nos.6 and 7. He submits that the respondent Nos.4 and 5 without any valid title and basing on the forged will deed allegedly executed by Smt K. Pushpavathi are trying to register the document and the registering authorities cannot register the document basing on the said will deed. He submits that the respondent Nos.4 and 5 without any valid title and basing on the forged will deed allegedly executed by Smt K. Pushpavathi are trying to register the document and the registering authorities cannot register the document basing on the said will deed. He further submits that in fact late K. Pushpavathi had executed the will deed in favour of the respondent Nos.6 and 7 on 22.02.2019 before the Notary public and the respondent Nos.6 and 7 are in possession of the property and after the death of Smt K. Pushpavathi, the respondent Nos.4 and 5 are trying to interfere with their possession and the respondent Nos.6 and 7 have filed criminal case against them and also filed W.P.No.8508 of 2020. In view of the same, the registering authorities cannot register the document of the suit schedule property in favour of the psetitoner in W.P.No.25229 of 2023 or others basing on the document executed by the respondent Nos.4 and 5 herein and requested to dismiss the writ petition and allowed W.P.No.8508 of 2020 by directing the registering authorities not to execute the document for the suit schedule property. 10. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration submits that in view of pendency of W.P.No.8508 of 2020, the respondent No.3 has passed the impugned refusal order rejecting the registration of the document and requested to pass appropriate orders. 11. After hearing both sides and perusal of the record, this Court is of the considered view that originally the suit schedule property belongs to late Smt K. Pushppavathi. The respondent Nos.4 and 5 and the respondent Nos.6 and 7 herein are relatives of late Smt K. Pushpavathi. The respondent Nos.4 and 5 herein have filed O.S.No.304 of 2019 on the file of Additional Junior Civil Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiri District against the respondent Nos.6 and 7 and the Sub-Registrar, Quthbullapur for declaration to declare them as sole joint owners and possessors of the suit schedule property. The said suit was transferred to the Court of III Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-X Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Medchal and renumbered as O.S.No.304 of 2022 and the same was decreed in favour of the respondent Nos.4 and 5 on 29.11.2022. The said suit was transferred to the Court of III Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-X Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Medchal and renumbered as O.S.No.304 of 2022 and the same was decreed in favour of the respondent Nos.4 and 5 on 29.11.2022. Pending the said suit, the respondent Nos.6 and 7 herein fled W.P.No.8508 of 2020 seeking to direct the Sub-Registrar not to register any document basing on the will deed executed by late Smt K. Pushpavathi, but nowhere mentioned about filing of the suit by the respondent Nos.4 and 5 herein. 12. The respondent Nos.6 and 7 have stated that said late K. pushpavathi had executed the will deed in their favour on 22.02.2019, but failed to approach the competent Civil Court for declaration. On the other hand, the respondent Nos.4 and 5 have approached the competent Civil Court impleading the respondent Nos.6 and 7 as the defendant Nos.1 and 2 in O.S.No.304 of 2019 and subsequently renumbered as O.S.NO.304 of 2022. In spite of filing of writ petition along with the ex parte decree, the respondent Nos.6 and 7 have not taken any steps to set aside the said Judgment and Decree. It clearly shows that the respondent Nos.6 and 7 without approaching the competent civil Court for declaration of title and possession have filed this writ petition before this Court for not to register any document basing on the will deed executed by Smt K. Pushpavathi in favour of the respondent Nos.4 and 5. After filing W.P.No.8508 of 2020, the suit for declaration was decreed in favour of the respondent Nos.4 and 5 for suit schedule property and in view of the same, the registering authorities cannot refuse to register the document basing on pendency of W.P.No.8508 of 2020. The Judgment relied on by the learned counsel for the petitoner in Kunchanapalli Mysooraiah’s case (supra 1) squarely apply to the instant case. 13. The W.P.No.8508 of 2020 filed by the respondent Nos.6 and 7 has become infructuous as the same issue was considered by the competent Civil Court and passed Judgment and Decree in O.S.No.304 of 2022 on the file of III Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-X Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Medchal dated 29.11.2022 in favour of the respondent Nos.4 and 5 in W.P.No.25229 of 2023. In view of the same, W.P.No.8508 of 2020 is dismissed as infructuous. 14. In view of the same, W.P.No.8508 of 2020 is dismissed as infructuous. 14. In view of the above findings, W.P.No.25229 of 2023 is allowed by setting aside the order of Intimation of Refusal No.41 of 2023 dated 26.07.2023 passed by the respondent No.3 and the respondent No.3 is directed to register and release the pending registration of Document No.P.152/2023 dated 20.07.2023 in favour of the petitioner in respect of the suit schedule property within four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. 15. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending in these writ petitions, shall stand closed.