Allowed

Anumolu Gandhi Ramu, v. The Sub Registrar

Telangana HC9 Aug 2012WP/24219/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allows a writ petition challenging the Sub-Registrar's refusal to register a sale document for land originally assigned but purchased in auction. Relying on a Division Bench judgment, the court directed the registering authority to process the documents for transfer without treating them as assigned lands, subject to standard scrutiny under the Stamp and Registration Acts.

What did the court decide?

Directed the registering authority to receive and process sale documents for registration without treating the lands as assigned, subject to scrutiny under the Stamp and Registration Acts.

Anumolu Gandhi Ramu, Vs The Sub Registrar — Cooperative Societies | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.24219 of 2012

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in refusing to register the document with regard to sale of lands admeasuring Ac.5.00 cents in R.S.No.14-3 of Kethavaram Village, T.Narsapuram Mandal, West Godavari District, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶5

It is the case of the petitioner that originally the aforesaid land was assigned in favour of one Yalamanchili Prasadarao. It is stated that the said assignee obtained loan from the Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society, K.Jaggavaram, by mortgaging the said lands and when the loan amounts were not repaid, the Society through the District Cooperative Central Bank, Eluru, which is a society under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (for short ‘the Act’), by obtaining award, brought the said lands for sale and the petitioner has purchased the same in the auction conducted in execution of awards passed under the provisions of the Act against the original assignee. It is also stated that aforesaid sale was confirmed in favour of the petitioner and sale certificate was also issued.

¶6

In this writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitioner that as he wanted to sell the aforesaid lands, he approached the first respondent for presentation of documents for registration, but the same are not being received by the first respondent on the ground that the lands are listed as assigned/Government lands as per the list issued by the Tahsildar, the 2^nd respondent.

¶7

The said issue is no more res integra in view of the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court, for which, I am a Member, in the case of SUB REGISTRAR, SRIKALAHASTI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT AND ANOTHER v. K.GURAVAIAH AND ANOTHER^[1] . In the said judgment, the Division Bench of this Court while interpreting the provisions of Sections 5 and 6 and Explanation to Section 2 of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1997, held that if the assigned lands are purchased by the third parties in execution of award by the Cooperative Central Bank, they lost the characteristics of assigned land and the SubRegistrar cannot refuse to register the documents presented for transfer of title on the ground that the said lands were assigned ones. Even the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents states that subject matter of this writ petition is covered in view of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in K.GURAVAIAH’s case (1 supra).

¶8

Following the judgment referred to above, as it is stated that the petitioner purchased the lands in question in the auction conducted in execution of the awards passed under the provisions of the Act, I allow this writ petition with the direction that if the documents for sale in respect of the lands admeasuring Ac.5.00 cents in R.S.No.14-3 of Kethavaram Village, T.Narsapuram Mandal, West Godavari District, are presented by the petitioner for registration, the registering authority shall receive and process the same for registration without reference to the ground that the said lands were originally assigned. It is made clear that it is open to the 1^st respondent to scrutinize such documents in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 and

¶9

the Registration Act, 1908. No order as to costs.

¶10

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petition, if any, shall stand

¶11

disposed of.

¶12

___________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY,J

¶13

09.08.2012 v v

¶14

[1] 2009(2) ALD 250 (DB)

Anumolu Gandhi Ramu, v. The Sub Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anumolu Gandhi Ramu, v. The Sub Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Khaja Mohiddin, Vs The District Registrar of Assurances

Shahanaz, Vs The Tahasildar

K.S. Sriramulu, Vs The Joint Collector

Challagulla Indira Devi Vs The Sub Registrar, Chintalapudi West

Teneti Prabhavathi, W/o late Narasimha Vs The District Collector (La)

B.Narendra Reddy s/o. B.YeIIa Reddy Vs The Joint Sub-Registrar