Smt. Prema Devi vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 52748 of 2016
Smt. Prema Devi
…..Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and 4 others
…..Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashwani Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Hari Pratap Gupta, Ramesh
Chandra Tiwari
AFR
Reserved on:03.07.2026
Delivered on:07.07.2026
Court No. – 4
HON'BLE NEERAJ TIWARI, J.
HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J.
(Per:Hon’ble Vivek Saran, J.)
1. Heard Sri Ashwani Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner,
learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos.1 and 2 and Sri Ramesh
Chandra Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent nos.3 to 5.
2. The instant petition has been preferred with the following relief:
“I. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the
impugned order dated 24.09.2016 passed by the Assistant Insptector General
of Registration, Gorakhpur.”
3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the petitions are as follows:
The complaint was made by one Jang Bahadur @ Jangi @ Jangi
Prasad @ Jagdish before respondent no.2 on 14.07.2016 alleging
that the registered sale deed dated 12.07.2026 bearing Registration

2
WRIC No. - 52748 of 2016
No.2452/2016 alleging that his real brother Firangi Prasad
impersonated complainant/Jang Bahadur has sold his land situate
at villages Rakauli, Jharkata, Sodhaveer and Kohna, Gopalpur,
District Gorakhpur to how own wife Prema Devi and as the said
sale deed has been executed by playing fraud, therefore, the same
may be cancelled.
4. On the said complaint vide order dated 14.07.2016 the Deputy
Registrar, Gola, Gorakhpur was directed to submit a report and also
other executants and the marginal witness and the deed writer were also
informed to submit proof of identity. Thereafter on the basis of an
enquiry and exercising the provisions of the Government Order dated
13.08.2013 bearing no.  0 0-07-684/11-2013-700(446)/13, the
क नि
respondent no.2/Assistant Inspector General of Registration, Gorakhpur
cancelled the sale deed dated 12.07.2016 being Registration No.2452 of
2016 registered at the office of Sub-Registrar, Gola Janpad, Gorakhpur.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the registering
authority under the Registration Act, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the
Act’) after registration of sale-deed becomes functus officio and ceases
to have any jurisdiction or authority and neither the Sub-Registrar nor
any superior officer has authority to cancel a duly registered sale-deed.
He further submitted that the Full Bench of this Court inRe: Smt. Kusum
1
Lata v. State of U.P. has held that a duly registered sale-deed under the
Act cannot be cancelled by an envoking administrative power and it is
only the civil court of competent jurisdiction which can hold a duly
registered document as null and void. He has further submitted that even
the Government Order dated 13.08.2013 has been quashed by this Court
inRe: Krishna Kumar Saxena and another v. State of U.P. and 9
2
Others .
6. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the order dated
24.09.2016 passed by the respondent no.2 is wholly just and legal and
call for no interference, as the same is on the basis of a fact finding
1 2018(6) ADJ 344
2 2018(5) ADJ 156

3
WRIC No. - 52748 of 2016
enquiry. He has further submitted that at the relevant time of passing the
order, the Government Order dated 13.08.2013 was in existence and any
quashing of the Government Order at a subsequent stage would not
nullify its effect. He has further made a statement at bar that the
contesting respondent are pursuing appropriate civil remedies as well.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
8. The sole issue for consideration before this Court is as to whether the
respondent no.2 was justified in cancelling the duly registered sale-deed.
9. There is no dispute about the settled legal position with respect to the
judgment rendered inRe: Smt. Kusum Lata (supra) that a duly
registered saldeed under the Act cannot be set aside by registering
authority or by any authority invoking administrative powers, if the
registration is questioned even on the count of impersonation/fraud. The
relevant paragraphs of the judgment are reproduced hereunder:
"(1) - This Larger Bench has been constituted under the orders of Hon'ble the
Chief Justice on basis of the order dated 22.05.2017 passed in Writ-C No.
2973 of 2016. In the case aforesaid, a Division Bench of this Court arrived at
the conclusion that the view taken in the case of Radhey Shyam Arora Versus
State of U.P. and 6 others (Writ-C No. 63439 of 2013), decided on
20.11.2013 is in conflict with a view taken in Raj Kumari Versus State of U.P.
and others (Misc. Bench No. 2562 of 2014), decided on 28.03.2014 and
looking to the divergent views taken by two Division Benches matter requires
consideration by a Larger Bench. The Division Bench under the order dated
22.05.2017 referred following questions for adjudication by Larger Bench:-
"(a). Whether after a sale deed has been registered, the Assistant Registrar has
any authority of law to cancel the registered sale deed under the provisions of
the Registration Act, 1908 even if allegation of impersonation/fraud are
made?
(b). Whether the allegations of fraud are essentially, an allegation of fact
which need examination of oral or documentary evidence and can be
adjudicated on the basis of evidence to be led by the parties before competent
civil court?
(c). Whether the judgment in the case of Raj Kumari (supra) or the judgment
in the case of Radhey Shyam Arora (supra) lays down the correct law?......."
"(10)- The reference is answered in the terms that a sale deed registered
under the Act, 1908 cannot be cancelled or set aside by registering authority
or by any authority invoking administrative powers, if the registration is
questioned even on the count of impersonation/ fraud."

4
WRIC No. - 52748 of 2016
10. Further it is also not in dispute that this Court inRe: Krishna Kumar
Saxena and another (supra) has also quashed the Government Order
dated 13.08.2013 as being wholly without jurisdiction on the count that
no enquiry could be initiated by the authority or the document could
have been anulled by the authority. The relevant paragraphs are extracted
hereunder:
“(30)- The Government Order dated 13.8.2013 confers unfettered and arbitrary
powers upon the Registering Authority in violation of the express provisions of the
Registration Act and such Government Order cannot be invoked to annual a
document. The Government Order dated 13.8.2013 is not only arbitrary but is wholly
without jurisdiction and cannot be sustained.
(33)- In the light of the aforesaid, we find that the respondent nos. 4 to 10 had no
locus standi to question the veracity of the sale deed. No enquiry could have been
initiated nor the authority could have annulled the document. Consequently, the
impugned orders dated 23.9.2016 and 18.10.2016 passed by Assistant Inspector
General (Registration/Stamp), Rampur being without jurisdiction cannot be sustained
and are hereby quashed. The Government Order dated 13.8.2013 is also quashed."
11. Further this Court finds that once the law is settled then there can be
no other view possible in the matter regarding the competence of the
authorities to annul the duly registered sale-deed.
12. Insofar as the submission of learned counsel for the respondents that
the order impugned has been passed prior to the quashing of the
Government order by this Court is wholly misconceived and cannot be
appreciated. Once the Government order has been set aside then any
action which may have been taken by any authority cannot survive.
13. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the writ petition succeeds and is
allowed, the order dated 24.09.2016 passed by the Assistant Inspector
General of Registration, Gorakhpur is quashed.
14. No order as to cost.
15. It is however open for the respondents to seek appropriate civil
remedies available to him under law and the same shall be decided on
merits without being influenced by this judgment.
(Vivek Saran,J.) (Neeraj Tiwari,J.)
July 07, 2026
Deepika
Digitally signed by :-
DEEPIKA SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad