S.RENUKA Vs. DISTRICT REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition is filed to declare the action of 2nd respondent in receiving the document represented by the 4th respondent without the knowledge of the petitioner pursuant to the orders passed by the 1st respondent under Sec. 72 of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short "the Act") and processing the document for registration, without following the procedure prescribed under Sec. 32 (a), 58, 59 and 60 of the Act as arbitrary and illegal.

(2.) Initially, the deceased 1st petitioner filed the writ petition. Pending the writ petition, the sole petitioner died and the petitioners 2 and 3 came on record as legal representatives.

(3.) a) In the affidavit, it was contended, inter alia, that deceased 1st petitioner is the owner of house bearing No.5-35 admeasuring 1050 SFT together with land an extent of 141.76 square yards and another house with built up area of 403 SFT together with land an extent of 44.77 square yards situated in S.No.794/4. Deceased 1st petitioner is also owner of land admeasuring 99.66 square yards in S.No.796/2. The 4th respondent by creating forged agreement of sale filed suit O.S.No.245 of 2018 on the file of X Additional District Judge, Tirupati seeking specific performance of agreement of contract. In the suit, he filed I.A.No.521 of 2018 to restrain the defendant from alienating the schedule property and the Civil Court granted interim injunction on 1/10/2018.