Dismissed

Gollakummari Markondaiah, S/o Peraiah v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC1 Dec 2022WP/36099/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court issued a direction to the fifth respondent (Sub-Registrar) to receive and process the sale deed submitted by the petitioner under Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908. The writ petition, filed to challenge the refusal to register documents allegedly included in a prohibitory lands list, was disposed of solely on the direction to the Registry without address ing the merits of the

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 5th respondent to receive and process the sale deed under Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908 and pass appropriate orders if registration is refused.

Gollakummari Markondaiah, S/o Peraiah Vs The State… — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V. SUJATHA

¶2

Writ Petition No.36099 of 2015

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

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

¶5

“...to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent No.5 in refusing to entertain the Sale Deed for registration for the land in an extent of Ac.2.50 cents in Sy.No.1550-2 of Macherla Village fields, Macherla Mandal, Guntur District, stating the same is included in the Prohibitory Lands list furnished by the Respondent No.4 as arbitrary illegal contrary to the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and settled principles of legal position apart from being violative of the fundamental and Constitutional rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14, 19, 21 & 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.5 to entertain the Partition Deed for registration for the land in an extent of Ac.2.50 cents in Sy.No.1550-2 of Macherla Village fields, Macherla Mandal, Guntur District and release the same by declaring that the prohibitory lands list furnished by the respondent No.4 is not binding on the respondent No.5 and pass...”

¶6

¶7

Though the petitioner made several allegations

¶8

against the respondents, during hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners requested this Court, without going into the merits of the case, to issue a direction to the 5^th respondent to receive and register the document(s) presented by the petitioner.

¶9

Learned Government Pleader for Revenue readily agreed to receive and register the document(s) presented by the petitioner, in accordance with Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short ‘the Act’). However, it is relevant to refer to Section 71 of the Act, which reads as follows:

¶10

“(1) Every Sub-Registrar refusing to register a document, except on the ground that the property to which it relates is not situate within his sub-district, shall make an order of refusal and record his reasons for such order in his Book No. 2, and endorse the words “registration refused” on the document; and, on application made by any person executing or claiming under the document, shall, without payment and unnecessary delay, give him a copy of the reasons so recorded.

¶11

(2) No registering officer shall accept for registration a document so endorsed unless and until, under the provisions hereinafter contained, the document is directed to be registered.”

¶12

¶13

In view of the submission made by the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, the 5^th respondent is directed to receive and process the document(s) submitted by the petitioner as per the provisions of Section 71 of the Act. In case the instrument presented cannot be registered, the 5^th respondent shall pass appropriate orders as required under Section 71 of the Act.

¶14

Accordingly, with the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶15

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.

¶16

_______________ V. SUJATHA, J

Date: 01.12.2022

ASH

291

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶22

WRIT PETITION No.36099 of 2015

¶23

Date: 01.12.2022

¶24

ASH

Gollakummari Markondaiah, S/o Peraiah v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gollakummari Markondaiah, S/o Peraiah 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

Chikka Sathyanarayana, Vs The State.of Andhra Pradesh

Jayanthi Venkata Ramana Venkata Ramana Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh - Rep. by its

K.Reddeppa Naidu, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Kalvakuri Guramma, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

S. Raghunatha Naidu, Vs The State of A.P. rep.by its Prl. Secretary

Rayavarapu Ramanamma, Guntur District Vs Prl. Secretary, Revenue Dept., Hyd and 4 Others