Allowed

Malepati Venkata krishnaiah Naidu, , Venkataiah Naidu, v. The District Collector

Telangana HC30 Oct 2012WP/31796/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the Court held that the revenue authority illegally included private patta land in the list of prohibited properties based on arbitrary entries in the Resurvey and Settlement Register. The Court declared this action illegal and directed the Sub-Registrar to accept and process transfer documents for the land.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was allowed declaring the inclusion of the land in the prohibited list illegal; the Sub-Registrar is directed to accept and process transfer documents for the land.

Malepati Venkata krishnaiah Naidu, , Venkataiah Naidu, Vs… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.31796 of 2012

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents.

¶4

This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring the action of the third respondent – Tahsildar, T.Sundupalli, Kadapa District, in including the land admeasuring Acs.3.58 cents and Acs.3.60 cents covered by Survey Nos.411/2B and 412 respectively, situated at T.Sundupalli Village and Mandal, Kadapa District, in the list of properties prohibited for registration, communicated to the fourth respondent – Sub-Registrar, T.Sundupalli Town and Mandal, Kadapa District, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently, direct the fourth respondent to receive, register and release the document with regard to transfer of aforesaid land.

¶5

It is the case of the petitioners that they are absolute owners and possessors of aforesaid land. It is stated that the first petitioner’s father, by name, Malepati Pedda Narayana, purchased land admeasuring Acs.3.60 cents and Acs.3.58 cents covered by Survey Nos.412 and 411/2B respectively, situated at T.Sundupalli Village and

¶6

Mandal, Kadapa District, vide documents bearing No.1216/42, dated 25.05.1942. The said M.Pedda Narayana died leaving his two sons, namely, M.Ramachandraiah Naidu and M.Venkatakrishnaiah Naidu, who is the first petitioner herein. The second petitioner is the wife of the said M.Ramachandraiah Naidu. In this writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitioners that though the said land is a private patta land, the same is included in the list of prohibited properties sent by the third respondent illegally and erroneously basing on the entries in Resurvey and Settlement Register (RSR).

¶7

When the matter came up on earlier occasions, it was adjourned to enable the learned Government Pleader to obtain instructions. When the matter is taken up today, based on the written instructions, dated 18.10.2012 obtained from the third respondent, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents that the land in question is recorded as Assessed Waste based on the dots put in RSR. In view of the same, the said land is included in the list of properties prohibited for registration.

¶8

This Court in number of cases held that based on the entries in RSR, nature of ownership over private patta lands cannot be changed.

¶9

The petitioners have produced material before this Court showing that in all the revenue records, the land in question is recorded as a patta land and the petitioners are in possession of the same. The petitioners also claim that the land in question was purchased by way of registered sale deeds from its earlier owners. In view of the same, it is not open for the revenue authorities to include the said land in the list of properties prohibited for registration merely on the ground that in respect of the land in question, dots were put in RSR.

¶10

For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is allowed declaring that inclusion of the land in question in the list of properties prohibited for registration based on the entries in RSR is illegal and arbitrary. Consequently, there shall be a direction to the fourth respondent that in case the petitioners present any document with regard to transfer of land admeasuring Acs.3.58 cents and Acs.3.60 cents covered by Survey Nos.411/2B and 412 respectively, situated at T.Sundupalli Village and Mandal, Kadapa District, he shall accept and process the same for registration without reference to the list of properties prohibited for registration, sent by the third respondent. It is made clear that it is open for the registering authority to verify whether such document is in accordance with the

¶11

provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and Indian Stamp Act, 1899. No order as to costs.

¶12

In view of disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.40555 of 2012 also stands disposed of.

¶13

R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 30^th OCTOBER, 2012.

¶14

kvni

Malepati Venkata krishnaiah Naidu, , Venkataiah Naidu, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Malepati Venkata krishnaiah Naidu, , Venkataiah Naidu, v. The District Collector

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

A.Krishna Kumar, S/o. a. Gopalaiah Vs The Government of A.P.

Sri E.D. Nathan, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

P.Sudhakar Naidu, Vs The District Collector

Ponugoti Sreenivasulu Reddy Vs The Sub Registrar

Dumpa Srilakshmi Vs Government of Andhra PRadesh

Smt. Arava Kantamma W/o Sidda Reddy Vs The District Collector, Chittor District