Disposed

Yaganti Mallikarjuna Rao, v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC7 Feb 2020WP/1911/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that refusal to register a document based on an option letter is illegal under Section 71 of the Registration Act. The writ petition was disposed of without deciding the merits of the title, directing the respondents to receive and register the document.

What did the court decide?

The impugned notice of refusal is set aside; the 4th respondent is directed to receive and register the document P.No.2736 of 2019.

Yaganti Mallikarjuna Rao, Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶2

WRIT PETITON NO.1911 of 2020

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus , declaring the notice issued by the 3^rd respondent, dt.17-01-2020 refusing to register the document P.No.2736 of 2019, dt.31-12-2019 presented by the petitioner on the ground of alleged encroachment of land to an extent of 24 sq. yards in Sy.No.637/1/A2, situated at Macherla Village, and declare the same as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and the provisions of Registration Act, 1908, consequently direct the respondents 3 and 4 to register the document P.No.2736 of 2019, dt.31-12-2019 forthwith.

¶5

The main ground urged by this petitioner is that when the document is presented for registration, rejection of the same based on the Intimation of Refusal in respect of P.No.2736/2019 of Registrar Office, Guntur is illegal. Notice was issued in view of the injunction orders passed by the High Court of Madras. The Madras High Court directed based on a letter from Rev.B.M.Sudheer to The Inspector General of Stamps and Registration, State of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad not to register any deeds of conveyance by any of the parties to any of the parties in respect of the properties covered under the Scheme. But, the order was not communicated to Registrar except the letter of Rev.B.M.Sudheer to the District Registrar, who in turn issued such direction.

¶6

¶7

According to the order under challenge under Section 71 of the Registration Act, refusal to register a document by the Joint Sub-Registrar-I or any other officer based on letter of any individual or officer is illegal in view of the Division Bench two Division Bench judgments in P.Narasimha Reddy v. SubRegistrar, Shameerpeta Mandal, Ranga Reddy District¹ and S.Nagi Reddy v. Joint Sub-Registrar, Tirupati² . Therefore, the notice/order of refusal impugned in this Writ Petition is contrary to the law declared by the Division Bench and also another judgment of Single Judge in W.P.No.10721 of 2016, dt.01-04-2016, W.P.No.34689 of 2012, dt.12-12-2012. Hence, the impugned order/notice is hereby set aside, while directing the 4^th respondent to receive and register, if it is not prohibited by any order or law, the document by following the principles laid down in the judgments referred supra.

¶8

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of, without touching the merits in the title of the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶9

As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶10

JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶11

Date: 07-02-2020 Note: Issue CC by 25-02-2020. B/o. IS

¶12