Petitioner sought mandamus against a Sub-Registrar allegedly refusing to receive a conveyance deed for registration. The respondents stated no document had been refused; counsel agreed to present it afresh.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION NO: 4940 OF 2024
Between:
Bathula Kalyani, W/o.Amruth Kumar, Aged about 34 years, Occ Housewife, R/o.D.No.24-1-1, Yadavapalem Village, Chirala Town, Bapatia District.
...Petitioner
AND
...Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of.the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 2^^ respondent in not receiving and processing the deed of conveyance being presented by the petitioner for the registration of house and site for an extent of 113 sq. yards in Survey NO.201/3A of Tadepalli Revenue Village and Mandal of Guntur District, as iliegal, irregular, irrational, violative of provisions of The Registration Act, 1908 and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2'^^ respondent to receive and process the deed of conveyance being pretend by the petitionerinaccordancewith The Registration Act, 1908.
lA NO: 1 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition,theHighCourtmaybe m;,. r pleased direct the 2"^^ respondent to receive and process the deed of conveyance being presented by the petitioner for theregistrationofhouse, and site for an extent of 113 sq. yards in Survey No.201/3AofTadepalli Revenue Village and Mandal of Guntur District, pendingdisposalofthe main writ petition and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. NAGA PRAVEEN VANKAYALAPATI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR STAMPS AND REGISTRATION The Court made the following:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATI
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION No.4940 OF 2024
Bathula Kalyani, W/o Amruth Kumar, Aged about 34 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o D.No.24-1-1, Yadavapalem Village, Chirala Town, Bapafla District.
... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Stamps & Registration) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District and two others.
Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Naga Praveen Vankayalapati
Counsel for respondents : GP for Stamps & Registration
ORDER
Heard Sri B.Sanjay, learned counsel representing Sri Naga Praveen Vankayalapati, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps & Registration appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3.
\ \
- The writ petition is filed to declare the action of the 2 nd respondent in not receiving and processing the deedofconveyance being presented by the petitioner in respect of houseandsiteforan
Page 2 of 4
SRSJ WP No.4940/2024 ■>)
extent of 113 Sq.yards in Sy.No.201/3A of Tadepalli Revenue Village and Mandal of Guntur District, as illegal and arbitrary.
- Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of ACC cement roofsheetshed constructed in the land admeasuring 113 Sq.yards in Sy.No.213/3A of Tadepalli Revenue Village and Mandal of Guntur District.The petitioner purchased the same under Possessory agreementofsale dated 25.03.2023. Originally, the said land was granted to the vendor vide D-form Patta in D.IK.No.322/92. Pursuant to the agreement of sale, the petitioner and her vendor approachedthe2 nd respondent to furnish market value particulars of the property. The 2"^^ respondent furnished the market value particularsandassessed the value of the subject property at Rs. 15,000/- per square yard. However, the document presented by the petitioner was not registered. Hence, the writ petition.
/
A
Page 3 of 4
SRS,J WP No.4940/2024
- During hearing, learned counsel for the petitionerwouldsubmit that the petitioner will present the document before the 2 nd respondent- Sub Registrar, Mangalagiri, Guntur District.
If the -2"? respondent is of the opinion that the document cannot be registered, the 2 nd respondent shall pass orders as per Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908 and communicatethesaid refusal order to the petitioner. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall
stand dismissed.
SD/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR SE OFFICER
//TRUE COPY//
To,
gsg
/'•
Wif- HIGH COURT
./■ ■»<.
/ '•
DATED:25/04/2024
ORDER
WP.No.4940 of 2024
DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Sub-Registrar's refusal to receive the deed of conveyance presented by the petitioner was illegal or arbitrary.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Bathula Kalyani
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue (Stamps and Registration) Department
Sub-Registrar, Mangalagiri
Tahsildar, Tadepalli Mandal
Subba Reddy Satti
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
