Allowed

Jagarapu Chinna Venkata Ramana v. The Sub Registrar, Anakapalle

Telangana HC6 Feb 2009WP/27676/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners faced refusal of land registration due to doubts about land nature. Court held that once the government representative certified no claim, registration must proceed without No Objection Certificate.

What did the court decide?

1st respondent directed to process registration documents within ten days without insisting on production of N.O.C. or raising dispute.

Jagarapu Chinna Venkata Ramana Vs The Sub Registrar… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2009)

¶1

THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.27676 of 2007

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

The petitioners purchased an extent of Ac.22.60 cents of land in Sy.No.195/2, of Bayyavaram Village, Kasimkonda Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, from the owners of the said land. The sale deeds were presented before the 1^st respondent for registration. The 1^st respondent refused to register the documents on the ground that the mere certification as to the nature of the land by the Mandal Revenue Officer would not be sufficient, and the same has to be crossverified by the District Collector, as per the instructions issued by the Inspector General of Stamps and Registration. The petitioners feel aggrieved by the action of the 1^st respondent.

¶4

The 1^st respondent filed a counter-affidavit, stating that as soon as the clarification sought by him is furnished, the documents would be admitted to registration. The 2^nd respondent also filed a counteraffidavit stating inter alia that the land in Sy.No.195/2 is a patta land, and they have no claim over it.

¶5

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue.

¶6

The 1^st respondent entertained some doubt as to the nature of the land, obviously, in the context of prohibition, contained under Section 22-A of the Registration Act. However, once the 2^nd respondent has certified the character of the land, and he did not make any claim on behalf of the Government, the documents ought to have been processed for registration. At any rate, in his counteraffidavit the 2^nd respondent has now clarified that the land in question is held as patta, and that the Government has no claim over it.

¶7

Hence, the writ petition is allowed, and the 1^st respondent is directed to process the document presented by the petitioners for registration, within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, without insisting on production of no objection certificate, or raising dispute, as to the nature of the land. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶8

________________________ Dt.06-02-2009. L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J.

¶9

Jagarapu Chinna Venkata Ramana v. The Sub Registrar, Anakapalle

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagarapu Chinna Venkata Ramana v. The Sub Registrar, Anakapalle

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pothuganti Papaiah Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Nyalamadugu Sreedhar Vs Sub Registrar Of Assurance

Gowravarapu Ramanaiah Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary

Mohd Zafarullaha Khan Vs The District Collector

Kilari Ramachandranaidu, Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

Chintareddy Madhusudhan Reddy, Vs Government of A.P.