Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (1.59 seconds)Section 31 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Smt.P.Veda Kumari And Others vs The Sub-Registrar, Banjara ... on 18 August, 2017
ix) The issue of cancellation of registered conveyance deeds was
considered by this Court in Yanala Malleshwari v. Ananthula
Sayamma2 and P. Veda Kumar v. The Sub-Registrar, Banjara Hills,
Hyderabad3. This Court on consideration of facts and after discussing
the relevant case laws refused to cancel the registered sale deeds therein.
It was held that discretion under Article 226 must be exercised only in
exceptional cases when alternative remedies are available. For
cancellation of registered documents, the appropriate forum is the civil
Court under Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. It further held
that where factual questions are involved the Court should refuse to grant
relief under Article 226.
S.C.Pandian vs The Inspector General Of Registration on 9 August, 2019
x) The issue of cancellation of registered documents under Article
226 was also considered by the Madras High Court in S.C. Pandian v.
The Inspector General of Registration Santhome4. It was held:
Yanala Malleshwari And Ors. vs Ananthula Sayamma And Ors. on 24 October, 2006
ix) The issue of cancellation of registered conveyance deeds was
considered by this Court in Yanala Malleshwari v. Ananthula
Sayamma2 and P. Veda Kumar v. The Sub-Registrar, Banjara Hills,
Hyderabad3. This Court on consideration of facts and after discussing
the relevant case laws refused to cancel the registered sale deeds therein.
It was held that discretion under Article 226 must be exercised only in
exceptional cases when alternative remedies are available. For
cancellation of registered documents, the appropriate forum is the civil
Court under Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. It further held
that where factual questions are involved the Court should refuse to grant
relief under Article 226.
The Registration Act, 1908
The Land Acquisition Act, 1894
Narmada Bachao Andolan vs State Of M.P. & Anr on 11 May, 2011
iv) In Narmada Bachao Andolan v. State of Madhya Pradesh1,
the Supreme Court held that allotment of alternative land is to be decided
by the Government based as per availability and feasibility. The relevant
portion is extracted below:
1