You can seek recovery of any loss to you if such things happen. Need to study entire papers for any opinion 

Under section 47 of The registration Act, a registered document operates from the date of execution, not from the date of registration.

Therefore the Sale deed takes effect from Feb 2000 and not from July 2004
The GPA was valid on the date of execution & presentation hence the Cancellation of GPA in Sept 2001 is irrelevant.

You may please note that a document is executed and presented for registration, subsequent events (death, cancellation of GPA, etc.) do not invalidate it, if delay is due to registration formalities.
The undervaluation delay does NOT invalidate execution.

The revenue department cannot declare sale void, cannot adjudicate title, cannot decide GPA validity. Their role is ministerial, not judicial.
Only a civil court can declare sale void or cancel a registered sale deed
High Courts repeatedly held that Mutation / khata cannot be cancelled on title disputes unless backed by a civil court decree.

The critical legal point in your case is the distinction between execution/presentation of the sale deed and completion of registration, and how cancellation of the GPA in between impacts the transaction.
In law, a sale deed becomes effective from the date of execution, not from the date of registration, provided the document is eventually registered. Registration relates back to the date of execution under Section 47 of the Registration Act, 1908. Therefore, if a sale deed is executed and presented for registration while the GPA was valid, subsequent events (including cancellation of GPA) do not invalidate the sale, even if registration is completed later due to administrative reasons such as undervaluation.
Applying this principle to your facts:
• The GPA was granted in August 1997 with authority to sell.
• The sale deed was executed and presented in February 2000.
• At that time, the GPA was still valid (cancellation happened only in September 2001).
• The delay in registration until July 2004 was due to undervaluation proceedings, which is an act of the registering authority, not the parties.
Legally, this means the sale stands protected. The cancellation of GPA in 2001 cannot retrospectively invalidate a sale deed that was already executed and presented in 2000 when authority existed.
Courts across India have consistently held that once execution and presentation are complete during the subsistence of a valid power of attorney, later cancellation has no effect. Registration is a ministerial act; delay in completing it does not destroy the transaction if the foundational authority existed on the execution date.
Now addressing the revenue department’s notice and allegation of fraud:
Revenue authorities do not have jurisdiction to declare a registered sale deed void. They cannot cancel title or katha merely by interpreting GPA validity issues. Their role is limited to fiscal administration. Even if they suspect fraud, they must approach a civil court; they cannot unilaterally invalidate conveyances.
If the sale deed is registered and there is no civil court decree declaring it void, revenue officials cannot cancel katha merely on the ground that GPA was cancelled later. Any such cancellation is legally challengeable.
Also important: you are a third purchaser. Bona fide purchasers for value without notice are given strong protection in property law. Even if there were disputes between the principal and GPA holder later, those disputes cannot prejudice third-party purchasers whose title flows from a registered instrument executed when authority existed.
On litigation risk:
Yes, litigation is possible — because anyone can file a case. But the legal sustainability of such litigation is weak. The original owner would have to prove all of the following:
• That the GPA did not authorize sale (contrary to your facts), or
• That the sale deed was not executed/presented in 2000, or
• That registration delay nullifies execution (which law does not support), or
• That fraud was committed at execution stage (very hard to prove after decades).
Mere cancellation of GPA after execution is not sufficient to void the sale.
On katha cancellation:
If revenue authorities proceed to cancel katha without a civil court decree, your remedy is:
• File a detailed written reply enclosing the GPA (1997), sale deed execution date (2000), presentation proof, and registration completion (2004).
• Cite Section 47 of the Registration Act (relation-back doctrine).
• Clearly state that revenue authorities lack jurisdiction to declare registered sale deeds void.
If cancellation still happens, you can:
• File an appeal/revision before higher revenue authority, or
• File a writ petition seeking restoration of katha and quashing of the cancellation order. Courts routinely interfere in such cases.
Practical next steps recommended:
• Secure certified copies of GPA, sale deed, presentation receipt, undervaluation proceedings, and registration endorsement.
• Obtain a written legal opinion explicitly recording that execution and presentation predate GPA cancellation.
• Reply to the revenue notice in writing — do not ignore it.
• If cancellation order is passed, challenge it immediately; delay weakens position.
In conclusion:
The sale is not invalid merely because the GPA was cancelled after execution and presentation but before completion of registration. The delay in registration due to undervaluation does not render the transaction void. Revenue authorities cannot cancel katha on this ground without a civil court decree. While nuisance litigation is possible, your legal position is strong if execution and presentation in 2000 are clearly established.

2) The delay due to "pending undervaluation" is a procedural issue with the stamp office, not a lapse in the agent's authority. 

Sale deed is valid 

Under section 47 of The registration Act, a registered document operates from the date of execution, not from the date of registration.

Therefore the Sale deed takes effect from Feb 2000 and not from July 2004

The GPA was valid on the date of execution & presentation hence the Cancellation of GPA in Sept 2001 is irrelevant.

Moreover the endorsements made at the backside of the registered document clearly establishes the legal facts.

Therefore you may proceed ahead however you may better consult an experienced lawyer in the local for clarification of practical issues.

Your deed is VALID because:

• Executed Feb 2000 + presented March 2000 (both BEFORE GPA cancelled Sept 2001)

• GPA cancellation AFTER execution cannot void a deed already executed

• Your stamped proof (back of deed) showing "presented March 2000" proves this

You are 3rd buyer = Extra protection:

• Only original GPA transaction validity is questionable (between GPA holder & 1st buyer)

• You hold registered deed; Supreme Court says registered successors are protected even if original GPA was invalid​

Revenue notice is WRONG:

• Cannot cancel katha based on GPA cancellation that happened AFTER your deed was executed & presented

• File objection citing: execution/presentation dates pre-date cancellation + you're registered 3rd buyer

• Cite Suraj Lamp judgment: GPA invalidity doesn't affect registered successors​

Bottom line: Your sale deed stands. Revenue officer's interpretation is legally incorrect. File objection with your stamped proof of March 2000 presentation.

You can do the aforesaid 

Your additional facts significantly strengthen your case and practically answer the revenue department’s allegation.

From what you have now clarified, the legal position is very clear:

The sale deed itself contains official endorsements showing:

• Presentation before the Sub-Registrar in March 2000
• Execution recorded in February/March 2000
• Initial stamp duty of ₹54,000 paid in 2000
• Balance stamp duty of ₹63,000 paid in July 2004
• Registration completed thereafter due to undervaluation proceedings

These endorsements are not private claims; they are statutory acts of the registering authority recorded on the document itself.

In law, this conclusively establishes that:

• The sale deed was executed and presented while the GPA was valid
• The GPA cancellation in September 2001 is irrelevant
• Registration in 2004 is only completion of a pending ministerial act
• Section 47 of the Registration Act squarely applies (registration relates back to execution)

Once execution and presentation are proved to have occurred during the subsistence of GPA authority, no subsequent cancellation can undo the sale.

On the allegation of “fraud” by the revenue authorities:

• Revenue officials have no power to declare a registered sale deed fraudulent or void
• They cannot cancel khatha merely by re-interpreting title documents
• Even suspected fraud must be adjudicated only by a civil court
• Until a civil court decree exists, the registered sale deed binds the revenue authorities

Your case is even stronger because:

• You are a third-level bona fide purchaser
• The transaction is over 20 years old
• There are official stamps, endorsements, and payment records
• The delay was caused by government undervaluation proceedings, not by the parties

What you should do now (very important):

1. File a detailed written reply to the revenue notice enclosing:

• Copy of GPA (1997)
• Sale deed showing execution & presentation in 2000
• Endorsements and rubber stamps
• Proof of stamp duty payments (2000 + 2004)

• Execution and presentation predate GPA cancellation
• Section 47 of the Registration Act applies
• Revenue authorities lack jurisdiction to declare sale void

If they still cancel khatha:

• File an appeal/revision before higher revenue authority immediately, or
• Approach the High Court in writ jurisdiction to quash the cancellation

Courts routinely restore khatha in such situations because revenue authorities cannot sit in judgment over registered conveyances.

Bottom line:

With the endorsements and stamp records you describe, the sale is legally secure.

The GPA cancellation in 2001 does not affect it.

Any khatha cancellation on this ground alone is unsustainable in law and will not survive judicial scrutiny.