Vithaldas Vs. Union of India

constitution - scope of public interest litigation - article 226 of constitution of india - petition filed against 8 relatives to take action in accordance with provisions of income tax act for accumulating vast wealth and money - petition filed for extraneous consideration - held, petition being directed by personal motive and not in public interest liable to be dismissed. - specific relief act, 1963 [c.a. no. 47/1963]. sections 31 & 34: [bilal nazki, v.v.s. rao & g. chandraiah, jj] [per court] cancellation of registered sale deed inherent power of registering authority - fraudulent transfer of property sale taking place by reason of fraud played by transferor and transferee held, it is void. true owner can nullify the sale by executing and registering a cancellation deed without seeking declaration or cancellation of fraudulent transfer deed from court. registering authority is empowered to cancel sale deed earlier registered. registration of document cannot be understood to be an absolute sale divesting vender of its title else it would render sections 31 and 34 of specific relief act, otiose. -- transfer of property act,1882[c.a. no. 4/1882]. sections 53 & 126: [per court] cancellation of registered sale deed inherent power of registering authority - fraudulent transfer of property sale taking place by reason of fraud played by transferor and transferee held, it is void. true owner can nullify the sale by executing and registering a cancellation deed without seeking declaration or cancellation of fraudulent transfer deed from court. registering authority is empowered to cancel sale deed earlier registered. registration of document cannot be understood to be an absolute sale divesting vender of its title else it would render sections 31 and 34 of specific relief act, otiose. .....public character who files pils., has the responsibility of making necessary investigation in the first instance and to bring him findings to the notice of the concerned authorities before moving the constitutional courts by way of pils. the very fact that the petitioner happens to be the relative of the eight persons against whom he wanted the enquiry indicates that the petitioner is not a probono public character but the writ petition is filed for extraneous consideration.2. this court speaking through one of us (srn, j) while dealing with unscrupulous and unjustified pil in thakur bahadur singh v. government of a.p., : 1998(6)ald101 , had to observe in para 12 as under:'time has come for the constitutional courts not only to nib the unscrupulous and unjustified pils at the bud but also to make the movers of such pils accountable in concrete terms. mere disapproval of such pils by the courts will not help the public justice in the long run. the state spends huge sum of money out of the limited resources to provide, maintain and conduct apparatus of adjudicatory processes. if the court finds that the adjudicatory process is abused or misused wantonly by a person under the garb of pil, it is but necessary to make him accountable for his litigative luxury, in order to subserve the public interest. public interest will never be permitted to suffer in a public interest litigation. that can be achieved by imposing exemplary costs. one cannot have the pleasure of an unjustified pil at the cost of the public just payingrs.100/- towards court fee, a pittance when compared to the actual cost incurred by the state.'3. pil is a legal technique, a noble responsible technique which could be resorted to only by a bona fide public character surcharged by only public interest and nothing else. under the garb of pil no person can be permitted to abuse the process of law and waste the judicial time as pointed out in the above judgment.4. in the result and for foregoing reasons,.....