IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.1642 of 2008 Between: Syed Fiaz Mohammed, s/o Syed Basheer Mohammed, r/o h.No.17-1-4/7, Bandnaka, Edi bazar, Hyderabad-23. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commissioner and Inspector General of Registration and Stamps, Government of A.P., Door No.1-7-10, NBK Estates, Golconda Cross Roads, Mushirabad, Hyderabad. 2 Smt.Dasu Lakshmi w/o D.Suryanarayana, R/o H.No.12-2-709/66, Plot No.66, Navodaya Colony, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad. 3 Muneer Alam Khan, s/o Noor Alam Khan, r/o H.No.8-1-332/2/87/A, Aziz Bagh, Tolichowki, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an order or direction or writ, especially one in the nature of writ of certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the respondent No.1 in his proceedings No.AIG(S)/18750/2007 dated 27-12-2007 as illegal being without jurisdiction in the interest of justice and pass suchother order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI D.GOVERDHANACHARY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.1642 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner purchased plot No.516 admeasuring 178.95 sq. yards/150 sq. mtrs comprised in survey Nos.320/1/A, 320/1/AA, 320/2, 324, 326/1 and 326/2 situated at OU colony, Shaikpet Village of Hyderabad, from second respondent - Smt. Dasu Lakshmi by her GPA holder – third respondent - Muneer Alam Khan under a registered sale agreement-cum-GPA bearing document No.1902 of 2007 dated 18.05.2007 registered at the office of the Sub-Registrar, Banjara Hills. Second respondent filed an application before first respondent alleging that the agreement of sale-cum-GPA dated 03.04.3007 registered under document No.1296 of 2007 was registered fraudulently by using her name by another person by impersonation. She therefore requested for cancellation of the same. She also requested for cancellation of document No.1902 of 2007 dated 18.05.2007, which was executed consequent to the earlier document. First respondent issued notice to petitioner and respondent Nos.2 and 3. After conducting summary enquiry first respondent came to a conclusion that document No.1296 of 2007 and document No.1902 of 2007 are fraudulent documents and accordingly by impugned order dated 27.12.2007 cancelled both the documents, aggrieved by which present writ petition is filed seeking its invalidation. This Court while admitting the writ petition on 31.01.2008 ordered status quo. Second respondent filed W.V.M.P.No.2062 of 2008 along with counter affidavit. This Court, after perusing the pleadings and considering the rival submissions is of the considered opinion that Section 69(1)(j) of Registration Act, 1908 (Registration Act, for brevity) does not either explicitly or impliedly empower the Inspector General to cancel a registered document. Section 69 of Registration Act empowers the Inspector General to make rules consistent with Registration Act and shall exercise general superintendence over all registration offices in the territories under State Government. The Rule so made as per Section 69(2) of Registration Act shall be submitted to State Government for approval. After judgment of Full Bench of this Court in Yanala Malleshwari v Ananthula Sayamma[1], Rule 26(i)(k)(i) of the Andhra Pradesh Rules under Registration Act, 1908 (Rules, for brevity) was added presumably by first respondent. As per this provision, registrating officer is conferred with limited power of cancellation of deeds previously registered after giving notice to the parties. Registration Officers are those who are appointed under Sections 5 to 7 of Registration Act. The Inspector General of Registration is the authority appointed by State Government and he is not conferred with any powers of registration officer though he has been conferred with other powers under Stamp Act and Registration Act. Therefore, power under Rule 26(i)(k)(i) of Rules cannot be exercised by the Inspector General and such power can be exercised only by registration officer, who registered document initially. It is brought to the notice of this Court that petitioner filed O.S.No.7634 of 2007 on the file of the Court of VII Additional Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, for permanent injunction against respondent Nos.2 and 3 and the same is pending. As held by this Court in Yanala Malleshwari (supra) when a person is aggrieved by registration of document or cancellation is passed without jurisdiction, the same is liable to be set aside. Accordingly impugned order dated 27.12.2007 passed by first respondent is set aside leaving it open to the parties to agitate the matter in pending civil suit referred to hereinabove. With the above directions and observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Observations made hereinabove are meant only for the purpose of present order and the same do not bind the civil Court. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 10th December, 2008 GHN To 1 Commissioner and Inspector General of Registration and Stamps, Government of A.P., Door No.1-7-10, NBK Estates, Golconda Cross Roads, Mushirabad, Hyderabad. 2 2CCs to G.P for Revenue, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. 3 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RS} [1] 2006(6) ALT 523 (FB)