Deepika Chit Funds Private ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2022 Latest Caselaw 9471 AP

     HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
          WRIT PETITION No.35571 of 2015

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

"....to issue Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent Nos.3 and 4 herein in not taking action pursuant to the complaint given by the Petitioner Company seeking cancellation of sale deed dated 21.03.2012 registered as document No.2543/2012 executed by the 6th respondent herein in favour of the 5 th respondent herein in respect of land admeasuring 182 square yards of land in Door No.14-9-135 situated at Raja Ram Mohan Rai Road, Chirala, Prakasham District, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and contrary to the scheme of arrangement approved by this Hon'ble Court by its order dated 25.10.2008 passed in Company Petition Nos.196, 197 of 2003 on the file of Hon'ble High Court and consequently direct the Respondent Nos.3 and 4 herein to set aside the said sale deed dated 21.03.2012 registered as 5th document No.2543/2012 executed by the 6th respondent herein in favour of the 5th respondent herein in respect of land admeasuring 182 square yards of land in Door No 14-9-135 situated at Raja Ram Mohan Rai Road, Chirala, Prakasham District in the interest of justice ...."

At the time of hearing, the learned Assistant

Government Pleader for Revenue submits that the lis

in this Writ petition is squarely covered by the

Judgment reported in Haji Mohammed Ahmed Vs.

State of Andhra Pradesh and others 1 and

Fazalullah Khan V. State of Andhra Pradesh,

rep.by its District Registrar and others 2.

In Haji Mohammed Ahmed Vs. State of

Andhra Pradesh and others(Supra), learned Single

Judge of this Court held as follows:

"The Supreme Court, in Thota Ganga Laxmi V.

Government of A.P.(1), held that if any sale deed is required to be cancelled, the only remedy is by way of a civil suit for cancellation, but no cancellation deed can be unilaterally executed or registered. The Supreme Court, after referring to Rule 26(i)(k) of the Registration Rules, held that it is only when the earlier sale deed is cancelled by a competent court can a cancellation deed be registered that too after notice to the concerned parties; and unilateral cancellation of the sale deed as well as registration thereof, were wholly void, non-est and meaningless. The observation of the Supreme Court, aforementioned, made in the context of sale deeds would equally apply to unilateral cancellation of gift deeds also. Unilateral cancellation of the gift deed in the present case must there be and is declared to be void. It is made clear that this Order will not preclude the respondent from invoking the jurisdiction of the competent Civil Court for cancellation of the subject gift deed".

In view of the above observations, this Writ

Petition is dismissed with a liberty to the petitioner to

2012(2) ALD 230

2012(2) ALT 728

approach competent civil Court. There shall be no

order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if

any, pending in this writ petition shall stands closed.

_______________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date : 08.12.2022 AVTP

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

WRIT PETITION No.35571 of 2015

Date : 08.12.2022

AVTP