Allowed

T. Nagamma v. The Govt. of a.P., Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Telangana HC5 Sept 2013WP/24468/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that without a notification under Section 22-A(2) of the Registration Act, 1908, the Revenue Department cannot prohibit registration based merely on dots in revenue records. The Sub-Registrar was directed to register the document.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Sub-Registrar to receive, process, and register the petitioners document without reference to revenue record entries.

T. Nagamma Vs The Govt. of a.P., Rep. by its Principal… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.24468 of 2013

¶3

Date: September 05, 2013

¶4

Between:

¶5

T. Nagamma. … Petitioner

¶6

And

¶7

1. The Government of A.P, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Hyderabad & 5 others. … Respondents

¶8

¶9

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶10

WRIT PETITION No.24468 of 2013

¶11

O R D E R:

¶12

The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the Sub-Registrar, Piler, Chittoor District, in refusing to receive and register the document presented by her relating to the land in Survey No.203-2 of Goodarevupalli Revenue Village, Piler Mandal, Chittoor District.

¶13

2. The Tahsildar, Piler Mandal, furnished written instructions dated 23.08.2013 to the learned Government Pleader for Revenue stating that the land in the subject survey number was classified as Government dry basing on the ‘dots’ entered against it in the ReSurvey and Settlement Register (RSR) of the village. It is on the basis of this entry that the Tahsildar asserted that the land belongs to the Government and that a prohibition would operate as to registration of documents relating thereto.

¶14

3. This Court has time and again held that entries in the revenue

¶15

records are insufficient to constitute proof of the Government’s title in respect of a particular land. In most such cases, the possession of the land is shown to be with the citizens belying the claim of the Government. Further, Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, as it stands presently, requires a Notification to be issued under subsection (2) thereof in the event the Government claims any avowed or accrued interests in any land under Section 22-A (1)(e). In the absence of such a Notification, it is not open to the Revenue Department to maintain its own registers and communicate lists of properties allegedly belonging to the Government under informal letters to the registration authorities and seek to introduce a prohibition as to registration of documents relating to such lands. The scheme of Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, does not permit this modus operandi.

¶16

4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the SubRegistrar, Piler, Chittoor District, to receive and process the document presented by the petitioner in respect of the subject land without reference to the entries in the revenue records, including ‘dots’ in the RSR. In the event the document presented is found to fulfil the requirements of the Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, the Sub-Registrar, Piler, shall complete the registration formalities and release the document in accordance with the due procedure. W.P.M.P. No.30112 of 2013 shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No costs.

¶17

__________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J

¶18

Date: September 05, 2013. 5 BSB

¶19

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶20

WRIT PETITION No.24468 of 2013

¶21

Date: September 05, 2013

¶22

BSB

T. Nagamma v. The Govt. of a.P., Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T. Nagamma v. The Govt. of a.P., Rep. by its Principal Secretary

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

Bathula Bhadraiah Vs State of A.P.

Ardula Baji, S/o.Muthaiah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal

Gaddala Naga Purushothama Rao, Vs The Sub Registrar

Moghal Hathala Baig, S/o Ismail Baig, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Immadi Pitchamma Vs A.P. State Waqf Board

Smt. C. Surekha, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal