Common order allowing four writ petitions challenging Sub-Registrars' refusal to register sale deeds, relying on the decision in W.P.No.23217 of 2012.
Writ petitions allowed relying on order in W.P.No.23217 of 2012; W.P.M.Ps. disposed of as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.16536, 17511, 18638 and 18662 of 2012
COMMON ORDER:
These Writ Petitions are filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respective Sub-Registrars in not entertaining the sale deeds sought to be presented by the petitioners for registration as illegal and arbitrary. At the hearing, it is agreed among the learned counsel for both the parties that the issues raised in these Writ Petitions are squarely covered in favour of the petitioners by order, dated 12.12.2012, in W.P.No.23217 of 2012.
In view of the same, these Writ Petitions are allowed in terms of the order, dated 12.12.2012, in W.P.No.23217 of 2012 with the direction that the reasons and the directions contained therein shall form part of this order.
As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petitions, the W.P.M.Ps., filed by the petitioners for interim relief are disposed of as infructuous.
____________________________ JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY 14th February 2013 DR
1 issue framed by the court
Whether writ petitions can be allowed in terms of an earlier judgment covering the same issues.
Petitioners
Respective Sub-Registrars
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
