APHC010141882025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 8720/2025 Between: Shaik Hafizulla, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. LOKESWARA PASUPULETI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in executing a registered sale deed bearing Doc No 233 of 2024, dated 9.01.2024 which was presented by the 4th respondent and executed in favour of 5th respondent fraudulently by suppressing the earlier sale agreement dated 18.10.2011 and also pending Specific Performance Suit I. e., O.S.NO.308 of 2019 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge Rayachoty upon the said land I e an extent of 260.36 Sq Yards situated in Sy No 865 in Rayachoti Municipal area Rayachoti Annamayya District and to declare the same as illegal arbitrary perverse by playing fraud misrepresentation violation of principles of natural justice violation of Article 300A of Constitution of India contrary to the sections and rules contemplated under Registration Act 1908 and also oppose to the settled principles of law and consequently set aside the registered sale deed bearing No 233 of 2024 dt 09 01 2024 registered by the 3rdrespondent in the interest of justiceand to pass such other order or orders...” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject land, admeasuring to an extent of 260.36 square yards, situated in Sy. No. 865, within the Rayachoti Municipal area, Rayachoti, Annamayya District. The 3rd respondent herein entertained the execution of a registered sale deed by the 4th respondent in favour of the 5th respondent, despite the pendency of a specific performance suit, O.S. No. 308 of 2019, before the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Rayachoti, which was instituted pursuant to an agreement of sale between the petitioner and the 4th respondent. 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submits that no order has been passed by the court below restraining the 4th respondent from alienating the subject property in favour of the 5th respondent. 5. In view of the reasons stated above, it is observed that, in the absence of any such restraining order or injunction, the 3rd respondent was not bound to refuse the registration of the sale deed executed by the 4th respondent in favour of the 5th respondent. Mere filing of a suit for specific performance, without any specific interim or final order restraining the execution or registration of the sale deed, cannot operate as a bar against the 3rd respondent. Therefore, no cause of action is survives to grant any relief in the present writ petition and writ petition itself is not maintainable. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. ______________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 04.04.2025 kkllkk 192 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.8720 of 2025 04.04.2025 kkllkk