IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 25491 of 2001 Between: N.Ashok, S/o. N.Yadagiri, R/o. H.No.1-27, Nallagandla Village, Sherilingampalli Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Inspector General of Registrations & Stamps, Golconda 'X' Roads, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Joint Sub Registrar, Hyderabad, Ranga Reddy District. 3 P.Nagaraju, S/o. Ch.Pandaraiah, R/o. H.No.1-48, Nallagandla Village, Sherilingamapalli Mandal, 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 to issue a Writ, order or direction preferably in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in cancelling the Gift Deed Document No.8194/97, executed by the 3rd respondent in favour of the petitioner by deleting the entries copied at page No.483 to 490 Volume No.3626 of the record through endorsemet No.3486 of 2001, as illegal, arbitrary without jurisdiction, violative of article 14, 19, 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to restore the above stated Gift Deed and the entries copied in the record by set asiding the above stated endorsement proceedings and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.RATHANGA PANI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ..... REGISTRAR THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI W.P.NO.25491 OF 2001 ORAL ORDER The petitioner herein claims title and possession in respect of 250 square yards of land situated in Sy.No.75 of Nallagandla, Sherilingampalli Mandal having acquired the same under a registered gift deed dated.27-11-1997 executed by the 3rd respondent herein. While so, the 3rd respondent executed another document in the year 2001 cancelling the gift deed dated.27.11.1997 and the same was duly registered by the 2nd respondent without notice to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same the present writ petition is filed contending inter alia that the action of the 2nd respondent in registering the cancellation deed and making endorsement to that effect in the records without notice to the petitioner is arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner also seeks a consequential direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to restore the gift deed dated.27-11-1997 and to set aside the entries made in the records relating to cancellation of the gift deed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record. It is to be noted that the Registration Act,1908 does not confer the power in registering authority to enquire into the validity of the document or to refuse registration. The law is also well settled that the instrument of gift of immovable property or the cancellation of such a document is a compulsorily registerable document under Section.17 of the Act. Hence the 2nd respondent can not be found fault with in registering the document presented by the 3rd respondent for registration. Even assuming that the cancellation of the gift deed by the 3rd respondent is illegal on any ground what-so-ever, the remedy of the petitioner is to seek appropriate declaration under Section.34 of the Specific Relief Act,1963 before a proper forum having jurisdiction. As the cancellation deed has already been registered, it is not open to the petitioner to raise any objection at this stage and the writ petition under Article.226 of the Constitution is not maintainable. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. However, this shall not preclude the petitioner to work out the appropriate remedy for redressal of his grievance before the proper forum. No costs. _____________ G.ROHINI,J 21st November,2008 *TSNR