M ANAJN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Sathakarni.K, learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as Sri B.Dileep Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration, who is representing respondent Nos.1 to 4. In the light of the limited relief sought for, issuance of notice to respondent Nos.5 and 6 is felt not necessary.

(2.) On hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration, what could be perceived is that respondent No.5 presented an Agreement of Sale-cum-General Power of Attorney in respect of Plot No.43, admeasuring 300 square yards, which is located in Sy.No.148 of Sahebnagar Kalan Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Rangareddy District, for registration before respondent No.4- Sub-Registrar, Vanasthalipuram, Rangareddy District; The petitioner, who claims to be the lawful owner of the said property, gave a representation to the 4th respondent-SubRegistrar, Vanasthalipuram, seeking him to stop registration; The Sub-Registrar, Vanasthalipuram, gave reply stating that there is no provision under the Registration Act, enabling the Registering Officer to stop the registration or to cancel a registered document. Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Petition is filed.

(3.) Making his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner purchased the subject plot through a valid sale deed and has been in possession of the said property till date. The 5th respondent, however, to grab the said property fraudulently, executed an Agreement of Sale-cumGeneral Power of Attorney in favour of 6th respondent and presented the same for registration. On knowing about the same, the petitioner tried to stop registration of the said document, however, he could not do so. Learned counsel stated that as the petitioner is the lawful owner of the property, registration of the Agreement of Sale-cum-General Power of Attorney, which was alleged to have been executed by 5th respondent in favour of 6th respondent, would cause irreparable loss to the petitioner and thus, necessary orders are required to be passed.