Emani Sujatha Vs the State of Ap

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 8582 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Emani Sujatha, aged 54 years, Female, Occ House wife R/o.D.No.7/205, Brahmamgari temple street, Kaikaluru (V) and (M), Eluru District. Erstwhile Krishna District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to government, (Stamps and Registration Department). A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. Guntur District.

¶12

The District Collector, Eluru. Eluru District.

¶13

The Sub-Registrar, Stamps and Registration Department),^Kaikaluru. Eluru District. Erstwhile Krishna District.

¶14

Ghantasala Prakasa Rao, Male, aged. 50 years, S/o. Late Desinga Raju, R/o.Eluru Road, Kaikaluru (V) and (M), Eluru District, Erstwhile Krishna District.

¶15

Chitturi Rammohan, S/o. Venkata Ranga Rao, Male, aged 58 years, R/o. Kaikaluru (V) and (M), Eluru District, Erstwhile Krishna District.

¶16

...RESPONDENT/S

¶17

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 an appropriate Writ, order or orders and direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No.3 colluded with Respondent No.4 and Played^fraud and committed material irregularity in issuing valuation certificate dated 25/4/2023 for E.P. Schedule property of two R.C.C. buildings in an extent of Ac.0.5 1/3 cents situated in Kaikaluru (V) and (M), market value is more than Rs.1,25,00,000/- and due amount is Rs.10,49,500/-. Property value is more than 9 times to the due amount, in E.A.No.25/2023 in I.A.No.1/2019 m O.S.No.178/2014 on the file of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kaikaluru orders dated. 2-4-2024 and sale dated 27/4/2023 as highly illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and clear vioiatton of Articles 14 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and clear vioiation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently to set aside sale dated: 27/4/2023.

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2Q2fi

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fiied in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant interim suspension of sale dated;27/4/2023 in E.A.No.25/2023 in E.P.No.1/2019 in O.S.No.178/2014 on the file of Civil Judge (Senior Division) Kaikaluru pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. B P RAJU

¶21

AND STa!wPS^°'^ Respondents No.1 to 3; GP FOR REGISTRATION

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents No. 4 & 5: None appeared

¶23

The Court made the following Order:

^ •/ / ^

[3329]

APHC010157452025

ai¥is

COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH IN THE HIGH at AMARAVATl (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶29

WEDNESDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶30

PRESENT

¶31

JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA THE HONOURABLE SRI

¶32

WRIT PETITION NO: 8582/2025

Between;

...PETITIONER

Emani Sujatha

AND

The State Of Ap and Others

¶38

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶39

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶40

1.B P RAJU

¶41

Counsel for the Respondent(S);

¶42

1.GP for REGISTRATION AND STAMPS The Court made the following:

¶43

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶44

WRIT PFTITIQN NO: 8582/2025

¶45

ORDER;

¶46

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the^Constitution

¶47

of the India seeking the following reliefs;-

¶48

“to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly^one :.iin the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action^of Respondent No.3 colluded with Respondent No. 4 and Played fraud and committed material Irregularity in^issuing valuation certificate dated 25.04.2023 for E.P. Schedule property of two R.C.C. buildings in an extent of Ac.0.5 1/3 cents situated in Kaikaluru Village and Mandal, market value IS more than 9 times to the due amount in E.A.No.25/2023 In I.A.No.1/2019 in O.S.No.178/2014^onthe file of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kaikaluru orders^dated 02.04.2024 and sale dated 27.04.2023 as highly illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and clear violation of^Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and clear violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently^to set aside sale dated 27.04.2023 and pass such other^order.” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the official respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed the present writ petition challenging^{theexecutionof} sale certificate issued by the Court below in E.P.No.1 of subject 2019 in O.S.No.178 of 2014 on the file of the Civil^Judge(Senior Division), Kaikaluru dated 02.04.2024 by way of material alteration and fraud. For which, learned counsel for the petitioner^reliedupon market value certificates issued by respondent No.3^on08.08.2022 and 25.04.2023. By that respondent No.3 in collusion with

¶49

3

¶50

respondent Nos.4 and 5 has issued certificates. By which the subject sale certificate was fraudulently issued and liable to be cancelled.

¶51

On the other hand, learned Government Pleader submits that the market value certificates said to have been issued by the 3'"^ respondent is borne out of the website of respondent No.1. The valuation of each certificate is basing upon the particulars of the subject property against which the market value is sought for. On perusal of the certificates, it indicates that the property particulars for which the market value certificate sought for is different from one^to one. The particulars provided in page No.32 of the^{writaffidavit} is D.No.75 an extent of 278.3 Sq. yards and the construction^area is 2400 Sq. feet and that is at semi finishing stage. Whereas survey number and extent mentioned in page No.33 of the writ^affidavit is D.No.205, 205/1 and build up area is only 350 sq. feet.^Thevaluation certificates bifurcates the land cost as well as structure costs. Once the property is different from one to one, it cannot be said that the market value is not tallied for the year 2022-2023. Basing upon that, the petitioner cannot be found fault with the respondents^andcannot be said that they fraudulently issued the certificates.

¶52

5, Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader and on perusal of the material placed on record, the allegation of the petitioner is that there are material alternations and by which the 3'""'

¶53

respondent committed fraud and issued sale certificate at lower rate is only a presumption or misunderstanding the particulars of two properties by the petitioner and without any basis. On perusal of both the certificates filed along with the writ petition, it appears that the property details i, e., door numbers mentioned at not one and the page 32 and 33 are same. Therefore same market valu e certificate cannot be issued for both properties as both are not one and the same.

¶54

On the other hand, 'ti is observed that the said certificates are digitally born certificates from the website such either the 3 rd of respondent No. 1 As respondent or the other respondents can neither alter nor change the values once it was uploaded in website. Therefore, the allegation of the petitioner that there i - IS collusion and undervaluation of the property of the petitioner i is baseless and with perversion only. Hence the petitioner is not entitled for any relief and moreover the presenl writ petition is filed without due process of law and the writ petition i is devoid of merits. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition 'si dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶55

As a sequel miscellaneous application. pending, if any, shall also stand closed.

¶56

To,

¶57

Sd/- M. SRINIVAS //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

¶58