Allowed

Smt.Devarapalli Jaya Sree, v. the Styate of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC17 Feb 2020WP/3052/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the court held that the failure to delete lands assigned prior to 18.06.1954 from the prohibitory list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, contrary to G.O.Ms.No.575 dated 16.11.2018, was illegal and arbitrary. The court directed the relevant authorities to delete the land from the list and the sub-registrar to accept the re

What did the court decide?

G.O.Ms.No.575 dated 16.11.2018 is to be implemented; subject land deleted from prohibitory list; 4th respondent directed to receive document and process registration.

Smt.Devarapalli Jaya Sree, Vs the Styate of Ap — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.3052 OF 2020

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution

¶5

of India seeking the following relief:

¶6

“to issue a writ order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4^th respondent in not receiving and registering the document presented by the petitioner for registration to the prospective purchaser on the ground that the land in Sy.No.358/7 to an extent of Ac.0.50 gts situated at Poranki village, Penamaluru Mandal, Vijayawada Division, Krishna District on the ground that the land is included in the prohibitory list issued under G.O.Ms.No.16 Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated 5.5.2016 issued by the 1^st respondent herein under Section 22-A (1) of Registration Act, 1908 is contrary to G.O.Ms.No.575 dated 16.11.2018 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Section 22(A) of Registration Act, 1908 and consequently direct the 2^nd respondent to delete/de-notify the aforesaid land in Sy.No.358/7 to an extent of Ac.0.50 cents situated at Poranki village, Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District from the prohibitory list issued under Section 22-A of Registration Act in pursuance of the G.O.Ms.No.575 dated 16.11.2018.”

¶7

It is the case of the petitioner that she purchased the land in Sy.No.358 to an extent of Ac.0.50 cents out of land admeasuring Ac.3.97 cents situated at Poranki Village, Penamaluru Mandal, Vijayawada, Krishna District under a registered sale deed vide Doc.No.375/1990 from her vendor Sodigadi Purushothamma for a valuable sale consideration and the vendor of the petitioner purchased the land under a registered sale deed No.1893 of 1981 registered at Sub-Registrar Office, Kankipadu from his vendor. The land in Sy.No.358 is purchased in the year 1950 by the predecessors in title vide document No.1137/1950 registered at Sub-Registrar’s Office, Kankipadu. Since the petitioner and her predecessors in title are in possession and enjoyment of the land, revenue authorities issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds. As the petitioner intend to sell the aforesaid land in Sy.No.358/7 to an extent of Ac.0.50

¶8

MSM,J Wp_3052_2020

¶9

¶10

cents to the prospective purchaser, approached respondent No.4 for issuance of Market value certificate and requested to receive the document for registration, respondent No.4 refused to receive the document on the ground that the aforesaid land is included in the prohibitory list issued by respondent No.1 in G.O.Ms.No.196 Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated 05.05.2016. Therefore, the petitioner requested this Court to allow the writ petition.

¶11

During hearing, Sri M.Durga Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner, reiterated the contentions urged in the petition.

¶12

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Assignments, Stamps and Registration fairly brought to the notice of this Court about G.O.Ms.No.575 Revenue (Assignment-I) Department dated 16.11.2018 and requested to pass appropriate orders.

¶13

It is the contention of the petitioner that the land in Sy.No.358 to an extent of Ac.0.50 cents out of land admeasuring Ac.3.97 cents situated at poranki village, Penamaluru Mandal, Vijayawada was purchased in the year 1950 by the predecessors in title vide document No.1137/1950. Later, the said land was included in the prohibitory list issued by respondent No.1 by G.O.Ms.No.196 Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated 05.05.2016. The reason for inclusion of the subject land in the list of prohibited properties is that the subject land is assigned land prior to 1954. As per G.O.Ms.No.575 Revenue (Assigned-I) Department dated 16.11.2018, the District Collectors are directed to delete the lands assigned prior to 18.06.1954 from the purview of Section 22-A of Registration Act, 1908. Therefore, respondent No.2 is bound to implement the directions issued in G.O.Ms.No.575 Revenue (Assigned-I) Department dated 16.11.2018, but no action was taken by

¶14

MSM,J Wp_3052_2020

¶15

3 respondent No.2 based on the said G.O. Therefore, the action of respondent No.2 in not deleting the property of the petitioner from the prohibited property list under Section 22-A (1) (e) of Registration Act, 1908 is illegal and arbitrary. Consequently, respondent No.2 is directed to implement G.O.Ms.No.575 Revenue (Assigned-I) Department dated 16.11.2018, pass appropriate orders, and communicate the same to respondent Nos.3 and 4 within one (1) month, on communication, respondent No.4 is directed to receive the document presented by the petitioner and process the same in accordance with law.

¶16

With the above direction, the writ petition is allowed. No costs.

¶17

Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶18

__________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶19

17.02.2020 Ksp

Smt.Devarapalli Jaya Sree, v. the Styate of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Devarapalli Jaya Sree, v. the Styate of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Boddepalli Damodar Vs the State of Ap

C. Narsimha Sarma at Narsimhaiah Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sagiraju Viswanadha Raju Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Govada Nireekshana Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Jammalla Sudhakar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sunkara Nageswara Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh