IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 15941 of 2008 Between: Kouda balakrishna S/o K. Vittal, R/o Ilapur Village, Lingampet Mandal, Nizamabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Registrar, Nizamabad District. 2 The Sub Registrar, Yella Reddy Nizamabad District. 3 Sri K. Vittal S/o Kistaiah R/o Ilapur Village, Lingampet Mandal, Nizamabd District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a writ, order or direction, more particularly, one inthe nature of Writ of mandamus directing the ﬁrst and second respondent not to register the Document on Sy. Nos. 981/A, 981/B and 981/C to an extent of Ac. 3.03 guntas in Lingampet Village and Mandal, Nizamabad District which will be submitted by the 3rd respondent herein and pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.RAGHAVENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO.15941 OF 2008 ORAL ORDER: The petitioner states that his grandfather purchased the property in question and after his demise, the name of the father of the petitioner, who is the unoﬃcial third respondent herein, has been mutated in the relevant revenue records. While so, it is his case that the unoﬃcial third respondent, entered into an agreement in his absence with the third party to sell the property in question oblivious of the fact that it is an ancestral property. Therefore, the petitioner made an application to the ﬁrst and second respondents herein on 18.07.2008 requesting them not to register any document executed by the unoﬃcial third respondent in respect of the property in question but to his surprise, the ﬁrst and second respondents, when contracted personally, informed him that they would ignore his representation and if any document is submitted for its execution by the third unoﬃcial respondent herein, they would go ahead with the same in accordance with law. Aggrieved by the action of the ﬁrst and second respondents herein, the present writ petition is filed. There is no provision in the Registration Act, which enables the Registrar to deny the registration of document when it is properly presented for registration. If that be so, exercising the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court cannot issue any direction, much less as prayed for, to the ﬁrst and second respondents herein. The remedy of the petitioner, if any, is to approach the competent civil Court having jurisdiction and obtain injunction order restraining the ﬁrst and second respondents herein in registering the document executed by the third unoﬃcial respondent herein in respect of the property in question. Therefore, I see no merit in writ petition, which is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed at the admission stage. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J. Date: 24.07.2008 VGSR