Allowed

N. Krishnavenamma v. The Sub-Registrar of Assurances

Telangana HC30 Apr 2011WP/13450/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court in this writ petition directed the Sub-Registrar, Avanigadda, to entertain a sale deed presented by the petitioner for registration. The Court held that the Sub-Registrar is duty-bound to process conveyance deeds transferring immovable property and must pass appropriate orders if registration is not liable.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to entertain the conveyance deed and deal with it in accordance with law.

N. Krishnavenamma Vs The Sub-Registrar of Assurances — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2011)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No. 13450 OF 2011

¶3

O R D E R:

¶4

Complaining that the 1^st respondent Sub-Registrar, Avanigadda is not receiving and entertaining the document of sale presented by the writ petitioner herein, this Writ Petition has been filed.

¶5

It is the case of the writ petitioner that she acquired land of Ac.0.09 cents situate in D.No. 253/42 of Avanigadda Village by way of a registered sale deed dated 23.08.1974 and ever since then, she was in continuous possession and enjoyment of the said property, but however, for her personal requirements, when she preferred to sell away the said property in favour of the purchaser and presented the said document for registration, the Sub-Registrar is declining to entertain the same without assigning any reasons.

¶6

Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908 clearly spells out that any conveyance deed conveying the right, title and interest over immovable property of the order of more than Rs.100/- is liable to be compulsorily registered. Section 22-A of the 1908 Act dealt with the prohibition of registration of certain documents, whereas Section 32 dealt with the procedure for presenting documents for registration. The further details are also contained in that regard in Section 32-A and 33. Under Section 34 of the Act, an enquiry can be conducted by the registering officer, while Section 35 dealt with the procedure on admission and denial of execution respectively. Similarly, Section 36 dealt with enforcing of the appearance of executants and witnesses before the registering officer. Section 38 dealt with the persons who have been exempted from appearing at the time of registration. Therefore, the Sub-Registrar is duty-bound to entertain all such conveyance deeds which deal with transfer of right, title or interest in immovable property of the value of more than Rs.100/- and deal with

¶7

the same in accordance with law strictly. If the Sub-Registrar, the registering officer, is satisfied that the document in question is not liable to be registered by him, he should pass an appropriate order in that regard, so that, necessary steps could be initiated for rectifying the defect pointed out by the Registrar, by the executants of such deed of conveyance.

¶8

I, therefore, direct the respondents to entertain the conveyance deed presented by the writ petitioner herein and deal with the same in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders thereon.

¶9

With this, the Writ Petition stands disposed of at the admission stage, after hearing the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. No costs.

¶10

---------------------------------(NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J)

¶11

30^th April 2011

¶12

ksld

N. Krishnavenamma v. The Sub-Registrar of Assurances

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N. Krishnavenamma v. The Sub-Registrar of Assurances

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

R.Satyanarayana Setty Vs The Revenue Divisonal Officer

Smt.Budamcherla Adilakshmi, W/o. Ramaiah, Vs The Tahasildar

M/s.Rockworld Engineers Vs The Commissioner

M/s Andhra Pradesh Re-rolling works at Mosapet Village, Vs The Joint Collector

Ms. N. Ravali Vs Government of India

Chaitanya Anantapur Residential Junior College Vs The District Collector