Dismissed

Smt. Azimunnisa, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Dec 2022WP/37612/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a mandatory writ to register certain documents regarding a land plot. The court directed the respondent to register and release the documents presented by the petitioner in compliance with Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908 within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of; the 2nd respondent is directed to register and release the documents pursuant to Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908 within two weeks.

Smt. Azimunnisa, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V. SUJATHA

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.37612 of 2016

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The present writ petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

¶5

“… to issue a Writ, One in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Wirt, Direction or Order declaring the action of the 2^nd respondent in not registering the documents sought to be presented by the petitioner with respect to the plot bearing No. 57 admeasuring 272 2/9 Sq yards in Sy. Nos 128/1, 128/3 and 340 in LP No 78/82 situated at Sri Sivakeasa Nagar, Kallur village, and Mandal, Kurnool district, in favour of third parties as being illegal arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2^nd respondent to register, release the sale deed that may be presented by the petitioner in respect of the above plot and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case… ”

¶6

This Court on 14.11.2018 while admitting the writ

¶7

petition, granted the following interim order:

¶8

"...the 2^nd respondent is directed to register the documents presented by the petitioner in respect of the above said site and the said order is subject to further orders passed in this writ petition..."

¶9

Today when the matter came up for hearing,

¶10

learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contentions urged in the writ petition and submits that it would be suffice if the interim order granted by this Court on 14.11.2018 is made as final order.

¶11

On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Revenue on instructions submits that the respondent authorities will consider register and release the document presented by the petitioner in accordance with Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908. However, it is relevant to refer to Section 71 of the Act, which reads as follows:

¶12

“(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.

¶13

(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.”

¶14

In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition directing the 2^nd respondent to register and release the document(s) presented by the petitioner as per Section 71 of

¶15

the Registration Act, 1908, within a period of two (2) weeks from

¶16

the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶17

Accordingly, with the above direction, this writ

¶18

petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶19

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall

¶20

stand closed.

¶21

________________________ JUSTICE V. SUJATHA

¶22

Date: 14.12.2022. ASH

Smt. Azimunnisa, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Azimunnisa, 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

Managing Committee Vs State of Ap,Prl.Scy,Revenue,Hyd,and 8

D.Venkataparatnam Vs Prl.Secy., Revenue Dept.,Hyd., and 3 Others

Kopanathi Venkata Rama Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal

Shaik Sameer Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary

Paladugu Bharath, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

P.v.Ramana Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh. Rep.by its Principal Secretary