IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 25756 of 2005 Between: P. Ramakrishnaiah, S/o. Late P. Venkataramaiah, H.No. 4-6-90/17/1, Tejeswinagar, Attapur, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Sub-Registrar-II, Office of the Sub-Registrar, Rajendranagar Mandal, Moosapet, Ranga Reddy District 2 The Commissioner of Registration, NTR Ramakrishna Studio's Office Complex, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 3 The Inspector General of Registration, NTR Ramakrishna Studio's Office Complex, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 4 L. Jaya Reddy, S/o. Late Raghava Reddy, R/o. 2-95/9/4, Masthan Nagar, Road No. 48, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad. 5 B. Sri Krishna, S/o B. Kutumba Rao, R/o. Plot No. 40, Prasanthnagar Colony, Miapur Village, Serilingampally Mandal & Municipality, Ranga Reddy District. .....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 exercise its special extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue writ order or direction in the nature of Writ of Certiorari by quashing the registration certiﬁcate of Agreement of Sale-cum-General Power of Attorney with Document No. 9565 of 2005 issued by the 1st respondent is illegal and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem ﬁt and proper in the circumstances of the case Counsel for the Petitioner: MS.S.TRIPURA SUNDARI Counsel for Respondents 1 to 3: G.P. for Stamps and Registration The Court made the following : ORDER: It is the case of the petitioners that he has purchased plot No.114 in S.No.74 and 75/part admeasuring 300 sq. yards equivalent to 25.80 sq. meters, situated at Gopannapally village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, under a registered sale deed in document No.4903/85 dated 18.07.1985. It is stated that the petitioner and his wife left to Florida, U.S.A to see their second son on 19.04.2005 and returned after three months i.e. on 27.07.2005. As he was in need of money to send to his third son, who is in U.S.A, he wanted to raise loan from the bank, and accordingly he has applied for encumbrance certiﬁcate for the said plot. But the Sub-Registrar of Ranga Reddy District stated that there was transfer of the property by the petitioner in favour of respondents 4 and 5 on 30.06.2005, on which date the petitioner was not at all in India. It is stated that the transfer deed dated 30.06.2005 is an agreement of sale-cum-general power of attorney said to have been executed by the petitioner in favour of respondents 4 and 5. It is stated that on 30.06.2005, the petitioner was in Florida i.e., in U.S.A and not available in India as he left India on 19.4.2005, and only returned on 27.07.2005. The petitioner submits that the said execution of G.P.A-cum-agreement of sale delivering the possession under Registered document No.9565, dated 30.06.2005 is a forged document and the same has been brought into existence by playing fraud in the hands of the Sub- Registrar, and therefore, the said document is nullity in the eye of law and registration of the said document is liable to be quashed. Respondents 4 and 5 ﬁled counter aﬃdavit stating that they have also realized that the registered document No.9565/2005 is not a genuine one and somebody fraudulently executed the same in their favour, and therefore, to avoid further litigation, they are prepared to relinquish their rights in favour of the petitioner. It is stated in the counter aﬃdavit that the respondents agreed to relinquish their rights and execute a fresh deed in favour of the petitioner provided the petitioner compensates the loss sustained by them, which is about Rs.2 lakhs for registration. Across the bar, Sri V. Sree Raghu Ram, the learned counsel appearing for respondents 4 and 5, submits that respondents 4 and 5 have voluntarily agreed to relinquish all their rights and execute the document in favour of the petitioner without insisting upon the payment of loss or any money. In view of the aforesaid undertaking and the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for respondents 4 and 5, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondents 4 and 5 to execute the deed of relinquishment transferring all the rights in respect of the property bearing plot No.114 situated in S.No.74 & 75/part of Gopannapally village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, in favour of the petitioner by cancelling document No.9565/2005 registered by the General Power of Attorney holder on 30.06.2005. However, the incidental expenses of the registration may have to be borne by the petitioner himself. No costs. __________________ (V. ESWARAIAH, J.) 25th August, 2008 Js. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Joint Sub-Registrar-II, Office of the Sub-Registrar, Rajendranagar Mandal, Moosapet, Ranga Reddy District 2 The Commissioner of Registration, NTR Ramakrishna Studio's Office Complex, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 3 The Inspector General of Registration, NTR Ramakrishna Studio's Office Complex, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 4 2 CCs to G.P. for Stamps & Registration, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad.(OUT) 5 2CD copies.