Allowed

E.N. Lakshmidevamma, v. The District Collector

Telangana HC4 Jun 2013WP/13354/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the refusal of the Sub-Registrar to register a document regarding assigned land, insisting on a Revenue 'No Objection Certificate'. The High Court held that since the land was assigned before 1954, it is not inalienable. The petition was disposed of directing the Sub-Registrar to receive and process the document if other legal requirements are met. Before: WP MP No.16392

What did the court decide?

Directed the Sub-Registrar, Chilamathur, to receive and process the document presented by the petitioner in respect of the subject land in Sy.No.2782 of Gorantla village & Mandal, Anantapur district,

E.N. Lakshmidevamma, Vs The District Collector — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.13354 of 2013

¶2

DATED: 04.06.2013

¶3

Between:

¶4

E.N. Lakshmidevamma ... Petitioner And The District Collector, Anantapur, Anantapur District & 3 others … Respondents

¶5

The Court made the following:

¶6

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶7

Writ Petition No.13354 2013

¶8

ORDER:

¶9

The petitioner assails the action of the Sub-Registrar, Chilamathur, Anantapur district, in not entertaining the document presented by her for registration in respect of the land in Sy.No.278-2 of Gorantla village & mandal, Anantapur district and insisting upon a ‘No Objection Certificate’ (NOC) from the Revenue Authorities for registering the document.

¶10

2. The petitioner asserts that the subject land was assigned as long back as in the year 1921 and would therefore not attract the prohibition envisaged by the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 and Section 22-A (1)(a) of the Registration Act, 1908.

¶11

3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue states on instructions that the subject land was, in fact, assigned long prior to the year 1954 when, for the very first time, a condition of nonalienability was attached to assignment of lands. This being the admitted case, the subject land would not be inalienable and would therefore not attract the prohibition applicable to assignments coupled with a condition of non-alienability. The Sub-Registrar, Chilamathur, Anantapur district, cannot therefore refuse registration of the document pertaining to this land applying such a prohibition.

¶12

4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the SubRegistrar, Chilamathur, to receive and process the document presented by the petitioner in respect of the subject land in Sy.No.2782 of Gorantla village & Mandal, Anantapur district, without reference to the fact that this land was originally an assigned land. In the event the document presented by the petitioner is otherwise found to fulfill the requirements of the Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, the Sub-Registrar, Chilamathur, shall complete the registration formalities and release the document in accordance with the due procedure. WP MP No.16392 of 2013 shall stand closed in the light of

¶13

this final order. No costs.

¶14

________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J Date: 04.06.2013 BSS

E.N. Lakshmidevamma, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E.N. Lakshmidevamma, 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Progressive Heat Treaters, (S.C.No. Hdn 1077), Vs Central Power Distribution Company of A.P Ltd.

Pasuparthi Jayaram, s/o P. Balaram, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Commissioner

N. Sinivasulu Naidu, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

Smt. Chandragiri Varalakshmamma, Vs The District Collector

Smt. Earle Yerrayyamma, Vs The Sub-Registrar

Earle Venkata Nagabhushana Rao, Vs The Sub Registrar