Allowed

Sri a.Nageswara Rao, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC4 Oct 2004WP/17801/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged refusal to register a sale deed for agricultural land due to an alleged INAM complaint. Court held registration cannot be denied without a government notification under Section 22-A(1) of the Registration Act. Petition allowed and Respondent required to register the document.

What did the court decide?

The 2nd respondent is directed to receive and register the document presented by the petitioners, with a requirement to pass appropriate orders communicating refusal reasons within two weeks if regist

Sri a.Nageswara Rao, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh — Telangana HC (2004) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO : 17801 of 2004

¶7

Between:

¶8

1 Sri A.Nageswara Rao, s/o Sri A.Ananthaiah, r/o Kongararaviryala Village, Maheswaram Mandal,

¶9

Ranga Reddy District.

¶10

2 Sri J.Damodar Reddy, s/o Sri J.Narsimha Reddy, r/o Jillellaguda, Saroornagar Mandal,

¶11

Ranga Reddy District.

¶12

..... PETITIONERS

¶13

AND

¶14

1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Hyderabad-A.P.

¶15

2 The Sub-Registrar, Maheswaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶16

3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Maheswaram mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶17

.....RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will 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^nd respondent in not receiving the document and registering the same in respect of an agricultural land of Acs.1.20 guntas in Survey No.383 situated at Kongara Khurd Village, Maheswaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, is illegal, violative of Section 22-A(1) of Registration Act, 1908 and consequently direct the 2^nd respondent to receive the document and register the same in the interest of justice.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.CH.RAVINDER

¶20

Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR REVENUE

¶21

The Court at the stage of admission made the following :

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

Petitioners claim to be the owners of land in an extent of Ac.1.20 guntas, in Survey No.383 , which is an agricultural land, situated at Kongara Khurd village, Maheswaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, under a registered sale deed, dated 11-10-2002. When the petitioners wanted to sell the said property and presented the document, the 2^nd respondent refused to entertain the said document, on the ground that the land in question, which is sought to be sold, cannot be registered in view of a complaint given by Dargha Hazarath Syed Shah Raju Hussaini Saini, alleging that the lands situated in Kongara Khurd village are the INAM lands of the said Dargha. In view of the same, the present writ petition is filed.

¶24

Learned Government Pleader submits that there is no notification issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh under Section 22-A(1) of the Registration Act, 1908, prohibiting the registration of the documents in respect of the Survey No.383, in the above said village. On issuance of such notification, the 2^nd respondent can refuse to receive the document for registration, but not as otherwise.

¶25

In view of the same, the 2^nd respondent is hereby directed to receive the document and register the same, as and when, the petitioner presented the same for registration, and for any reason, if the document cannot be registered, he has to pass appropriate orders and communicate the same to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of presentation of the said document.

¶26

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. No order as to costs.

¶27

(A.GOPAL REDDY,J)

¶28

Dated:04-10-2004 GJ

¶29

¶30

1 The Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue Department, Hyderabad-A.P.

¶31

2 The Sub-Registrar, Maheswaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Maheswaram mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶32

4 Two C.Cs. to the Government Pleader for Revenue, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad.(OUT)

¶33

5 Two C.D. copies.

Sri a.Nageswara Rao, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri a.Nageswara Rao, v. The Government 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

Smt.Bharathi Royra, Vs Municipal Corporation of Visakhapatnam

M/s. Ram Singh Mool Singh, Vs The Principal Secretary

Nehru Yuvak Sangam Banswada, Vs The Commissioner , A.P. Vaidya Vidhana Parishad

Suresh Sahu, Vs Ntr University of Health Sciences

Pulla Raja Goud Vs The District Collector, Karimnagar District

Kadiyala Kotaiah, Vs District Panchayat Officer