Disposed

Venkatarajesh Kumar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC17 Nov 2022WP/13781/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Writ Petition filed under Article 226, the Court addressed the refusal by the Sub-Registrar to register a sale deed regarding land declared prohibited under Section 22-A of the Registration Act. The Court disposed of the matter by directing the petitioner to initiate appropriate application through Mee-seva to de-notify the property from the prohibited list.

What did the court decide?

Director the petitioner to make an appropriate application through Mee-seva to de-notify the subject property from the list of prohibited properties notified under Section 22-A of the Registration Act

Venkatarajesh Kumar Vs The State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V. SUJATHA

¶2

Writ Petition No.13781 of 2015

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

¶5

“to issue a Writ or Order more in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4^th respondent in not receiving and registering the sale deed presented by the petitioner in respect of land in an extent of 175.4 square yards towards west side vacante site out of 268.77 square yards of open site in Survey No.272/G, 272/I, 272/J of Valiparthipadu village, Gudivada Mandal, Krishna District as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and unconstitutional and consequently to direct the 4^th respondent to receive, admit the sale deed in respect of the subject land for registration.”

¶6

The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that Surapaneni Keshavanaidu, who is vendor of the petitioner, is absolute owner of plot No.17A measuring an extent of 268.77 square yards of open site in Survey No.272/G, 272/I and 272/J of Valiparthipadu vllage Polam, Gudivada Mandal, Krishna district, having purchased the same through registered sale deed dated 24.12.2014 bearing document No.503/2015. Now, the petitioner, with intent to purchase

VS, J

W.P.No.13781 of 2015

the said property for a valid sale consideration of Rs.1,93,000/- to an extent of 175.4 square yards towards west side vacant site out of 268.77 square yards of open site in Survey No.272/G, 272/I and 272/J of Valiparthipadu village polam, Gudivada Mandal, Krishna District, entered into sale deed on 20.04.2015. They approached the 4^th respondent for registration of the sale deed, but the 4^th respondent refused to receive and register the document without any reason. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.

¶11

This Court, on 01.05.2015, while ordering notice before admission, passed the following order:

¶12

“The 4^th respondent is directed to receive the document presented by the petitioner for registration, process the same in accordance with the provisions of the Registration Act and if the document requires refusal, the 4^th respondent passes an order and communicate the same to the petitioner forthwith. In the alternative, the document is compliant the registration shall be completed within one week from the date of presentation.”

¶13

The 4^th respondent-Sub-Registrar, Gudivada, Krishna District, filed his counter contending that the

VS, J

W.P.No.13781 of 2015

Commissioner of Endowments, Hyderabad, vide his letter Rc.No.L1/4076/2014, dated 22.05.2015 informed that an extent of Ac.15.07 cents in Survey No.272 and an extent of Ac.5.64 cents in Survey No.294 at Valivarthipadu village, Gudivada Mandal, Krishna District, belongs to Sri Bheemeswara Swamy and Sri Venugopala Swamy temples and directed not to entertain any registrations in respect of lands situated in the said survey numbers. Further, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudivada, through letter Rc.D/164/2015, dated 19.03.2015 instructed the 4^th respondent to stop registrations in R.S.No.4 of Gudivada and R.S.No.272 of Valivarthipadu village until further orders. As per the enactment thorough A.P. Act 19 of 2007 under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, the land in question is prohibited for registration under Section 22A (1)(c) of the Act. It is further contended that the 4^th respondent vide order No.136 of 2015, dated 18.05.2015 passed orders refusing registration of the subject property.

¶18

Learner Government Pleader for Revenue stated that the Government constituted a Committee to consider the

VS, J

W.P.No.13781 of 2015

grievances of persons affected by the Notifications under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 regarding registration of prohibited properties, as per the orders dated 23.12.2015 passed in W.A.Nos.232 of 2012, 352 of 2013 and 343 of 2015, vide G.O.Ms.No.300, Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated 05.07.2016.

¶23

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the land in question is included in the list of prohibited properties maintained under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, this court deems it appropriate to direct the petitioner to make appropriate application as per G.O.Ms.No.300, Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated 05.07.2016.

¶24

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to make appropriate application through Mee-seva on payment of requisite fee for de-notifying the subject property from the list of prohibited properties notified under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908. There shall be no order as to costs.

VS, J

W.P.No.13781 of 2015

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any,

¶29

pending shall stand closed.

¶30

_______________ V. SUJATHA, J

¶31

Date: 17.11.2022 Ksn

Venkatarajesh Kumar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Venkatarajesh Kumar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

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

B.Thimmaiah, Vs The Joint Collector

Salivahana Sangam, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

S. Parvez Saheb, Chittoor Dist Vs Prl Secy, Revenue Dept., Hyd and 3 Ot

Dodda Seetamma, W/o. Dodda Ramalinga Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M/s Sri Udaya Bhanu Associates Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal

Buddareddigari Harikrishna Reddy, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh