THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH REW.WPMP.NO.39818 OF 2010 IN WP.NO.5809 OF 2001 AND WP.NO.5809 OF 2001 O R D E R Heard both the counsel. 2. REW.WPMP.No.39818 of 2010 is filed to review the order passed by this court in W.P.No.5809 of 2001 dated 28.4.2009. 3. Aggrieved by the registration of the impugned deed of cancellation bearing document no.3009/2000 dated 25.8.2000 purporting to cancel the petitioners’ registered sale deed bearing document no.2718/96 dated 4.10.1996, the present writ petition is filed. 4. A Full Bench of this court in YANALA MALLESHWARI AND OTHERS v. ANANTHULA SAYAMMA AND OTHERS[1] held that the executants of a document, is entitled to unilaterally cancel the registered document without the consent of the executee and his remedy is to approach the civil court. The aggrieved parties to the Full Bench judgment, carried the matter to the Apex Court. During the pendency of the appeal, as the said Full Bench judgment was not suspended, this court by order dated 28.4.2009 dismissed the writ petition, giving liberty to the petitioner to seek review of the order of this court, depending upon the result of the appeal before the Supreme Court. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner produced copy of the judgment of the Apex Court dated 13.7.2010 where under the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.791/2007 and batch had set aside the Full Bench of this Court, referred to supra. The relevant portion of the judgment of the Apex Court is extracted as under for better appreciation: “A writ petition was filed seeking declaration that the cancellation deed is illegal and that has been disposed of by the impugned judgment holding that the appellants should approach the civil court. In our opinion, there was no need for the appellants to approach the Civil Court as the said cancellation deed dated 4.8.2005 as well as registration of the same was wholly void and non est and can be ignored altogether. For illustration, if ‘A’ transfers a piece of land to ‘B’ by a registered sale deed, then if it is not disputed that ‘A’ had the title to the land, that title passes to ‘B’ on the registration of the sale deed (retrospectively from the date of the execution of the same) and ‘B’ then becomes the owner of the land. If ‘A’ wants to subsequently get that sale deed cancelled, he has to file a civil suit for cancellation or else he can request ‘B’ to sell the land back to ‘A’ but by no stretch of imagination, can a cancellation deed be executed or registered. This is unheard of in law. In this connection, we may also refer to Rule 26(i)(k) relating to Andhra Pradesh under Section 69 of the Registration Act, which states: “The registering officer shall ensure at the time of preparation for registration of cancellation deeds of previously registered deed of conveyances on sale before him that such cancellation deeds are executed by all the executants and claimant parties to the previously registered conveyance on sale and that such cancellation deed is accompanied by a declaration showing natural consent or orders of a competent Civil or High Court or State or Central Government annulling that transaction contained in the previously registered deed of conveyance on sale: Provided that the registering officer shall dispense with the execution of cancellation deeds by executants and claimant parties to the previously registered deeds of conveyance on sale before him if the cancellation deed is executed by a Civil Judge or a Government Officer competent to execute Government orders declaring the properties contained in the previously registered conveyance on sale to be Government or Assigned or Endowment lands or properties not registerable by any provision of law.” A reading of the above rule also supports the observations we have made above. It is only when a sale deed is cancelled by a competent Court that the cancellation deed can be registered and that too after notice to the concerned parties. In this case, neither is there any declaration by a competent court nor was there any notice to the parties. Hence, this Rule also makes it clear that both the cancellation deed as well as registration thereof are wholly void and non est and meaningless transactions.” 6. From the above judgment of the Apex Court it is cleat the deed of cancellation cannot be registered unless the previously registered conveyance is annulled by a competent civil court or High Court or State or Central Government. 7. As the Full Bench judgment of this Court referred to supra was set aside by the Apex Court, the petitioners filed the present review petition seeking to review of the order dated 28.4.2009 in W.P.No.5809/2001 is filed. 8. In the present case without there being any declaration from a competent civil court annulling the previous sale transaction, the registering authority registered the deed of cancellation deed and the same is wholly void and non est and a meaningless transaction, as held by the Apex Court. 9. In view of the above, the earlier order dated 28.4.2009 in W.P.No.5809/2001 is reviewed and the review petition is allowed. Consequently, the impugned deed of cancellation bearing document no.3009/2000 dated 25.8.2000 registered by the 2nd respondent – Joint Sub Registrar, I, Hyderabad, is set aside and accordingly the writ petition is allowed. No costs. AVS --------------------------------------------- -- 09—03—2011 [1] 2006(6) ALD 623