IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B. SUDERSHAN REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 14945 of 1994 Between: M.M.Meenakshi, D/o.MVS Chalapathy Rao, aged about 53 years, SRT 706, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The Sub Registrar, Rajendra Nagar Mandal R.R.District, Punjagutta, Hyderabad 2. The Inspector General of Registration and Stamps Government of A.P., Nampally, Hyderabad 3. Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Begumpet, Hyderabad represented by its Chairman, and Managing Director 4. S.Dananjaya Rao, S/o.S.Naidu, H.No.10-2-289/69, Shantinagar Hyderabad. 5. Smt.V.Krishna Kumari, W/o.Y.M.Bhaskar Reddy, H.No.10-3-299/A, Himayatnagar, Hyderabad-28. 6. Smt.Sowbhagyalakshmi, Sub-Registrar, Rajendranagar Mandal, R.R.District, Panjagutta, Hyderabad 7. Smt.Sarja Devi, W/o.Sri Rameshchandra Sahu H.No.14-6-244, Chandi Bazar, Hyderabad-500012. .....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, writ, or direction a) to declare that the documents registered on 9.5.94 in the O/o.1st respondent, styling the same as cancellation deed is illegal and can have no rights whatsoever and therefore it is liable to be declared as abinitio , void document and does not effect the title and rights of the petitioner under the sale deed executed on 7-8-1990 and registered on 26-11-1990 in the O/o.1st respondent. b) to declare that the action of the respondent No.6 in registering or getting it registered of the cancellation deed is malafide. c) It is also further prayed that the respondents should be directed not to effect a further sale of the plot of the land covered by the registered document No.15277/90 dated 26-11-1990 and basing upon the cancellation deed dated 7-5-1999 and registered on 9-5- 1994 in the office of the 1st respondent. d) To direct the respondent No.3 not to approve lay out in Survey Nos.52/1/4, 52/1/5, 61, 62/1, 63, 64, 65, 67, 68/1, 68/2, 69, 69/1, 70, 70/1, 72, 72/1 73, 76, 77, 85, 85/1, 86 to 94 and 120 to 126 at Sri Ram Nagar colony Puppalguda, Manikonda and Khalsa villages, Rajendranagar Mandal, RR District and 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:MR.P.BALA KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : Government Pleader for Revenue Counsel for the Respondent No.3: MR.T.NIRANJAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos: 4 & 5 : Mr.C.Malla Reddy The Court made the following Order : The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the cause in this writ petition does not survive, requiring any further adjudication. The Writ Petition shall accordingly stand dismissed. No order as to costs. Dt:17.06.2004 bsv ASSISTANT REGISTRAER // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER (One fair copy to the Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Sudershan Reddy for his Lordship’s kind perual) To 1. The Sub Registrar, Rajendra Nagar Mandal R.R.District, Punjagutta, Hyderabad 2. The Inspector General of Registration and Stamps Government of A.P., Nampally, Hyderabad 3. The Chairman & Managing Director Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Begumpet, Hyderabad 4. 2 CCs to the Government Pleader for Revenue High Court Buildings, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad.(OUT) 5. 2 CD copies