IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD Monday, September 12, 2011. Present: The Hon’ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan W.P.No. 24020 of 2011 Between: Y. Revathi ..Petitioner and The Sub Registrar of Registrations & Stamps, Erragadda, Hyderabad. …Respondent The Hon’ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan W.P.No. 24020 of 2011 O r d e r: Questioning the action of the respondent in not rectifying the entries in the Encumbrance Register as arbitrary and illegal; for a direction to the respondent to rectify the entries in the Encumbrance Register and restore the name of the petitioner against the property purchased vide registered sale deed No. 591 of 1987 dated:30.9.1986 the present writ petition is filed. 2. The petitioner’s case, in short, is that she had purchased the house situated at Vengalro Nagar, Hyderabad by registered sale deed dated:30-09-1986; the vendor of the property had obtained ex parte orders on 30-4-1999 for cancellation of the sale deed in E.P.No. 93 of 1999 in O.S.No. 2791 of 1998; pursuant to the said order having been communicated, the first respondent had cancelled the document without notice to the petitioner; thereafter the petitioner filed E.A.No. 140 of 2000 which was allowed by order dated:7.6.2000 recalling the earlier order dated:30-4-1999; the said order was communicated to the respondent on 15.6.2001; however, no action was taken pursuant thereto; the suit in O.S.No. 2791 of 1998, which was subsequently re-numbered as O.S.No. 11 of 2002 after it was transferred to the court of the IX Additional Chief Judge-cum-Fast Track Court, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, was dismissed by order dated:18—12—2003; and, as the said order had attained finality, the petitioner had requested that the document bearing No. 591 of 1987 be restored. 3. The learned Government Pleader for Revenue (Telangana Area) would state that the earlier legal notices dated: 02-05-2000 and 16.06.2000 are not available on record and, in case the petitioner submits another set of documents referred to in the said legal notices, the matter would be examined afresh and necessary orders would be passed thereupon. 4. While representations were made by the petitioner even thereafter, and as late on 27.4.2011, the documents in question do not seem to have been enclosed along with the said legal notice. 5. In the circumstances, I consider it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the petitioner to file a detailed representation enclosing thereto all the documents on which reliance is placed by her in support of her request, that her name be entered in the Encumbrance Register. In case the said representation, along with the necessary documents, is filed before the respondent within three weeks from today, the respondent shall consider the said representation in accordance with law and pass necessary orders thereupon within two months from the date of receipt of the said representation. 6. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J. September 12, 2011. *BVS Note: Furnish CC in a week. (BO) BVS.