Forged or Fraudulent Sale Deed on Your Property in Hyderabad: What the Law Says

This guide is for owners in Hyderabad and Telangana who find that someone has registered a sale deed, gift deed or power of attorney over their land or flat by impersonation, forgery or fraud, sometimes a relative. It explains why the Sub-Registrar cannot simply cancel such a deed, the civil suit to have it declared void or cancelled and the time limits, the criminal offences and how a police or Magistrate complaint works, the Hyderabad City Police procedure for these complaints, and what happens to the revenue and municipal records.

What to do first · Can the Sub-Registrar cancel it? · The civil suit · Time limits · The criminal law · Police and Magistrate · Revenue and GHMC records

What to do first

• Get the registered record: the Telangana Registration and Stamps Department describes an encumbrance certificate as “a record showing registered transactions pertaining to a property”, issued by MeeSeva centres and Sub-Registrar and District Registrar offices, and offers certified copies of registered documents. A registered deed is indexed and can appear in an encumbrance certificate; an unregistered paper will not. The department states that documents in its Book 1 “are public documents, so any public may inspect such book”.
• Keep your own title papers: your own registered deed, tax receipts, electricity and water bills, and anything showing your possession.
• Note when you found out: some of the time limits below run from when you learnt of the registration or of the facts, so write down the date and how you came to know.

The Registration Department itself warns buyers that “There are several cases of forged power of attorneys including fabricated powers as if given by NRI principals” and that “Impersonation cases be checked if proper enquiry is done about Vendor/Transferor”.

Can the Sub-Registrar cancel a forged deed?

• The Supreme Court: in Satya Pal Anand v State of M.P. (26 October 2016), a bench of three judges said: “There is no express provision in the Act of 1908 which empowers the Registrar to recall such registration”, and “Even the Inspector General has no power to cancel the registration of any document which has already been registered.” It added: “Once the document is registered, it is not open to any Authority, under the Act of 1908 to cancel the registration”, and that the aggrieved party “can challenge the registration and validity of the document before the Civil Court”.
• The registering officer’s role: the Court described the registering officer’s function as “purely administrative and not quasi-judicial. He cannot decide as to whether a document presented for registration is executed by person having title, as mentioned in the instrument.”
• The Telangana rule on cancellation deeds: under the Telangana Registration Rules, before accepting a cancellation deed of a previously registered sale deed, the officer checks that it “is executed by both the executing and the claiming parties thereof unless such Cancellation Deed is executed under the orders of a competent Court or under Rule 243” (Rule 26(i)(k)). Rule 243 concerns properties listed under section 22-A, such as Government, endowment and wakf land, not private property. In Satya Pal Anand, the Supreme Court noted that this kind of express rule exists in the Andhra Pradesh Registration Rules, which Telangana adopted.
• No separate cancellation power: the Registration Act, 1908 as in force in Telangana (Registration and Stamps Department text, in force on 2 June 2014) contains no section that lets a registering officer, District Registrar or Inspector General cancel a registered document.

So, for a sale deed, unless both the executing and the claiming parties join in a cancellation deed, Rule 26(i)(k) points to a cancellation deed executed under the orders of a competent court (Rule 243 applies only to section 22-A properties).

The civil suit

• Cancellation: “Any person against whom a written instrument is void or voidable, and who has reasonable apprehension that such instrument, if left outstanding may cause him serious injury, may sue to have it adjudged void or voidable; and the court may, in its discretion, so adjudge it and order it to be delivered up and cancelled” (Specific Relief Act, 1963, section 31(1)).
• Noting it in the registration records: “If the instrument has been registered under the Indian Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908), the court shall also send a copy of its decree to the officer in whose office the instrument has been so registered; and such officer shall note on the copy of the instrument contained in his books the fact of its cancellation” (section 31(2)).
• An owner who never signed: in Suhrid Singh v Randhir Singh (29 March 2010), the Supreme Court said: “Where the executant of a deed wants it to be annulled, he has to seek cancellation of the deed. But if a non-executant seeks annulment of a deed, he has to seek a declaration that the deed is invalid, or non-est, or illegal or that it is not binding on him.”
• Declaration: a person entitled to any right as to property may sue a person denying, or interested to deny, his title, and the court may in its discretion declare that he is so entitled; but “no court shall make any such declaration where the plaintiff, being able to seek further relief than a mere declaration of title, omits to do so” (section 34). An owner who has lost possession may therefore need to ask for possession as well.
• Injunction: temporary injunctions may be granted during a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, and a perpetual injunction by the decree (sections 37 and 38).
• Burden of proof: in Prem Singh v Birbal (2 May 2006), the Supreme Court said: “There is a presumption that a registered document is validly executed. A registered document, therefore, prima facie would be valid in law. The onus of proof, thus, would be on a person who leads evidence to rebut the presumption.”
• Court fee: under the Telangana Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956, the fee for a suit to cancel a document is computed on the value of the property for which it was executed (section 37), and for a declaration suit on the basis set out in section 24, depending on the relief claimed. Valuation depends on the facts; take advice.

See our guide on filing a civil case and on property disputes.

Time limits

The Limitation Act, 1963 has several articles that may apply, each three years unless stated otherwise:

• Article 56: “To declare the forgery of an instrument issued or registered”, from “When the issue or registration becomes known to the plaintiff”.
• Article 58: “To obtain any other declaration”, from “When the right to sue first accrues”.
• Article 59: “To cancel or set aside an instrument”, from when the facts entitling the plaintiff to have it cancelled “first become known to him”.
• Article 65: for possession of immovable property based on title, twelve years from when the defendant’s possession becomes adverse to the plaintiff.
• Fraud: where a suit is based on the defendant’s fraud, the period “shall not begin to run until the plaintiff or applicant has discovered the fraud or the mistake or could, with reasonable diligence, have discovered it” (section 17(1)). This does not enable a suit to set aside a transaction where property has been bought for value by a person who was not a party to the fraud and did not know or have reason to believe that any fraud had been committed (section 17, proviso).

A forged deed does not mean there is no time limit. In Prem Singh v Birbal, the Supreme Court said that once a suit is filed for cancellation of a transaction, “it would be governed by Article 59. Even if Article 59 is not attracted, the residuary Article would be”, and that “it is not correct to contend that the provisions of the Limitation Act would have no application at all in the event the transaction is held to be void.” Which article applies, and from when, depends on the facts; take advice early.

The criminal law

The BNSS First Schedule classifies each of these differently as cognizable or non-cognizable and bailable or non-bailable; forgery of a sale deed is not always in the same category. Under section 83 of the Registration Act, a prosecution for an offence under that Act which comes to a registering officer’s knowledge in his official capacity may be commenced by or with the permission of the Inspector-General, the Registrar or the Sub-Registrar.

Police and Magistrate

• FIR: information of a cognizable offence may be given to the officer in charge of any police station, “irrespective of the area where the offence is committed”, and a copy “shall be given forthwith, free of cost, to the informant” (BNSS section 173(1) and (2)). For offences punishable with three years or more but less than seven years, the officer may, with permission, hold a preliminary enquiry within fourteen days (section 173(3)).
• If the police do not register: the informant may send the substance of the information in writing and by post to the Superintendent of Police concerned, and if that fails, apply to the Magistrate (section 173(4)). A Magistrate may order an investigation on an application “supported by an affidavit” (section 175(3)), or the owner may file a complaint before the Magistrate, who examines the complainant on oath and must give the accused an opportunity of being heard before taking cognizance (section 223).
• The Hyderabad City Police procedure: the Commissioner of Police’s standard operating procedure on land disputes (Circular Memo of 7 March 2022) has a dispute type headed “FAKE / IMPERSONATED DOCUMENTS”. It tells officers to register a case under the appropriate law, collect documents, verify their genuineness with the authorities concerned, identify the owner and the “cheater / imposter”, obtain expert opinion, and then arrest and file a charge sheet; and: “Do not arrest without examining claims of both parties and getting expert / legal opinion.”
• Two sales of the same property: for “MULTIPLE SALE DEEDS”, the same procedure tells officers to register cases against the person who sold the land again “by suppressing earlier transaction/facts”, and says that if the later buyer is in possession the first buyer “should be advised to approach the concerned court”, and that police should not evict a later buyer who is in possession.
• Possession: the procedure also says that “the Police shall not involve in matters of possession of immovable property on their own accord”. The procedure was written in 2022 and refers to the old Indian Penal Code and Code of Criminal Procedure.

Revenue and GHMC records

• GHMC mutation: under G.O.Ms.No.155 of 30 May 2016, Sub-Registrars collect the mutation fee at registration and share transaction details with urban local bodies “to automatically initiate mutation at the time of transfer of immovable property”. GHMC’s procedure note says that, from 1 June 2016, mutation “will be initiated suo-moto by the Deputy Commissioner concerned based on the information received online from the Registration Departments web service”. A forged registered deed of a Hyderabad flat or plot can therefore lead to a change in the GHMC records without the owner applying.
• Agricultural land: under the Telangana Bhu Bharati (Record of Rights in Land) Act, 2025 (Gazette text as hosted by PRS Legislative Research), immediately after a registered transfer the Tahsildar amends the Record of Rights (section 5). A person affected by an entry may apply for rectification within the prescribed period (section 4(5)); orders can be appealed to the Revenue Divisional Officer and then the District Collector (section 15); and a person aggrieved as to a right of which he is in possession may sue for a declaration, after which the record “shall be amended in accordance with any such declaration” (section 18).

See our guides on illegal possession and encroachment, the encumbrance certificate and GPA and agreements of sale.

Related guides: property disputes, partition of family property, illegal possession, encumbrance certificate and filing a civil case.

For a discussion about a forged or fraudulent deed with Musab Hashmi & Associates, call +91 89771 24916 or send an enquiry. Do not include identity numbers or copies of documents in the first message.

General legal information, not legal advice. Checked on 28 October 2026 against the Specific Relief Act, 1963, the Limitation Act, 1963, the Registration Act, 1908 as in force in Telangana on 2 June 2014 (Registration and Stamps Department text) and the Telangana Rules under the Registration Act, the Telangana Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Telangana Bhu Bharati (Record of Rights in Land) Act, 2025 (Gazette copy hosted by PRS Legislative Research), G.O.Ms.No.155 of 30 May 2016 and GHMC’s mutation procedure note, the Registration and Stamps Department’s website, FAQ and buyer advisory, the Hyderabad City Police land-disputes procedure of 7 March 2022, and the Supreme Court judgments in Satya Pal Anand v State of M.P. (26 October 2016), Prem Singh v Birbal (2 May 2006) and Suhrid Singh v Randhir Singh (29 March 2010).