THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH Writ Petition No. 27962 OF 2005 DT.3.3.2011 Between: Smt Vattikuti Indira Devi … Petitioner And The State of A P, Registration and stamps Dept, Secretariat, Hyd and ors … Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri B Nalin Kumar Counsel for respondents 1 to 3: G P For Revenue Counsel for Respondent No. 4 : Sri O Manohar Reddy The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH Writ Petition No. 27962 OF 2005 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents 2 and 3 in registering the cancellation deed dated 27.1.2005 as Document No. 996 of 2005 of the Joint Sub Registrar’s office, Medak district at Sangareddy as arbitrary and violative of section 32 (A) of the Registration Act and for a declaration that the cancellation deed dated 27.1.2005 is null and void. The petitioner claims to be a member of 4th respondent society and she was allotted plot bearing No.240-G admeasuring 300 sq yards in survey No. 657, Patancheru village, Sangareddy taluq, Medak district and upon payment of entire consideration thesaid plot was transferred in her name vide registered sale deed dated 28.5.1985 vide document No. 6238 of 1985. while so, the 4th respondent without issuing any notice or prior consent of the petitioner has presented cancellation deed dated 27.1.2005 before the third respondent and the same was registered as document No.996 of 2005. Hence, the present writ petition. The learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Thota Ganga Laxmi & another Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and others ( in Civil Appeal No. 317 of 2007 and batch dated 13.7.2010), wherein it was held that there is no need for the appellants to approach the Civil Court as the cancellation deed and registration of the same was wholly void and non est and can be ignored altogether. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has explained the issued by an illustration, which reads as under; “….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. Further, while referring to Rule 26 (i) (k) under Section 69 of The Registration Act relating to Andhra Pradesh, the Apex Court observed as under; “…. 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 were wholly void and non est and meaningless transactions.” In the case on hand also there is neither any declaration from a competent Court nor there is any prior consent or a notice to the petitioner before cancellation. Hence, following the above dicta laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the cancellation deed dated 27.1.2005 in document No. 996 of 2005 is hereby declared as void and non est and a meaningless transaction. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. No Costs. ______________ V ESWARAIAH,J DATE: 3.3.2011 TVK THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH Writ Petition No. 27962 OF 2005 DT.3.3.2011