The Karnataka High Court held that the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) cannot unilaterally cancel a site allotment or registered sale deed once a site has been validly allotted and conveyed to an allottee or subsequent purchaser. Any such cancellation, without notice and due process, is ab initio void and unenforceable in law.​

Background and case facts

In January 2020, the Karnataka High Court was called upon to decide whether BDA could on its own cancel an earlier site allotment and the consequent registered sale deed, and direct the Sub-Registrar not to entertain further registrations relating to that property. The case involved a purchaser who had bought a BDA-allotted site through a registered sale deed and later discovered that BDA had executed a unilateral “cancellation deed” and blocked dealings on the site at the registration office.​

• The original allottee had obtained the site from BDA and a registered sale deed was executed in his favour after payment of the sital value.​
• A bona fide purchaser later acquired the site through a regular registered sale deed and had the khata transferred, treating the title as clear.​
• Years later, BDA executed a cancellation deed purporting to cancel the earlier conveyance and requested the Sub-Registrar not to register any transaction relating to the site.​

Issues before the High Court

The High Court examined two core questions flowing from these facts.​

• Whether BDA, after executing a registered sale deed in favour of an allottee, has any statutory power to unilaterally cancel that deed by executing a “cancellation deed”.​
• Whether the Sub-Registrar has authority to on his own cancel or nullify a registered document, or to act on such a unilateral cancellation by refusing further registrations.​

The petitioner argued that once a site had been validly allotted and conveyed, BDA ceased to be the owner and could not unilaterally divest the allottee or subsequent purchasers of title without recourse to a competent civil court. It was also submitted that the Registration Act does not empower the Sub-Registrar to cancel a registered sale deed on his own or on the mere request of BDA.​

Court’s key findings

The High Court strongly rejected BDA’s unilateral cancellation, emphasising basic principles of property and administrative law.​

• Once BDA executes a registered sale deed and receives full consideration, title passes to the allottee (and then to lawful purchasers), and BDA no longer retains ownership in that site.​
• BDA has no authority in law to unilaterally cancel a registered sale deed; if it alleges fraud, misrepresentation, or violation of conditions, the proper remedy is to approach a civil court for cancellation or other relief.​
• Similarly, the Sub-Registrar has no power under the Registration Act to cancel a duly registered sale deed or to treat a unilateral “cancellation deed” as if it nullifies the original conveyance.​

The Court held that the cancellation deed executed by BDA, without issuing any notice or affording an opportunity of hearing either to the original allottee or to the subsequent purchaser, violated principles of natural justice and was without jurisdiction. It described BDA’s action as “ab initio void and cannot be sustained in the eye of law”.​

Directions and relief granted

Having found BDA’s action illegal, the Karnataka High Court set aside the unilateral cancellation and protected the purchaser’s rights.​

• The cancellation deed executed by BDA and the consequential instructions issued to the Sub-Registrar were quashed.​
• The Court confirmed that the purchaser continued to hold valid title under the original registered sale deed, unaffected by BDA’s unilateral act.​
• The judgment reaffirmed that any challenge to such a sale deed has to be through appropriate legal proceedings, not by administrative fiats or cancellation memos.​

This ruling reinforced a consistent line of decisions where courts have held that development authorities cannot, after conveying title, simply “take back” a site or cancel an allotment without following due process and without a supporting decree of a competent court.​

Implications for BDA allottees and buyers

The 2020 ruling has significant implications for BDA site allottees, resale buyers, and the Bengaluru real estate market.​

• It offers legal reassurance to bona fide purchasers that their registered BDA sale deeds cannot be nullified overnight by unilateral orders or cancellation deeds issued by the Authority.​
• BDA is put on clear notice that, after executing a sale deed, it must use proper judicial channels if it believes there has been fraud, violation of allotment conditions, or misrepresentation.​
• The judgment also discourages arbitrary directions to Sub-Registrars, reinforcing that registration authorities must act strictly within the confines of the Registration Act and cannot “cancel” title based on unilateral requests.​

For buyers, advocates often draw from this and similar Karnataka High Court decisions when contesting cancellation orders, allotment withdrawals, or attempts to re-allot already conveyed sites, especially in BDA layouts and other statutory authority projects.​

  BDA cannot cancel site allotment unilaterally