Allowed

Sri.K.Sundara Rama Raju, v. Sub-Registrar

Telangana HC13 Sept 2013WP/26750/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 does not empower VUDA to restrain registration authority. The writ petition was allowed, directing the Sub-Registrar to receive and process the presented documents without reference to VUDA's restrictive letter, provided statutory requirements are met.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Sub-Registrar, Madhurawada, to receive, process, and complete registration formalities for the petitioners' documents in respect of specified plots in LP No.36 of 2009 in Sy.No.34/1, wit

Sri.K.Sundara Rama Raju, Vs Sub-Registrar — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.26750 of 2013

¶3

Date: 13.09.2013

¶4

Between:

¶5

K. Sundara Rama Raju & another . … Petitioners And The Sub-Registrar, Madhurawada Visakhapatnam & others

¶6

**… Respondents * * ***

¶7

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶8

WRIT PETITION No.26750 of 2013

¶9

ORDER:

¶10

The petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the SubRegistrar, Madhurawada, Visakhapatnam, in not registering the documents presented by them in respect of Plot Nos.6, 7, 16, 17, 18 & 29 of Rishikonda village, Visakhapatnam, in LP No.36 of 2009 in Sy.No.34/1. This refusal by the Registration Authority is based on the request of the Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority (VUDA) under its letter dated 12.04.2012.

¶11

2. This Court had occasion to consider this very issue in WP No.23217 of 2012. A copy of the order dated 12.12.2012 passed therein is placed on record. Perusal thereof reflects that this Court held that Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, did not empower the VUDA to address a letter to the Registering Authority restraining it from entertaining and registering documents. The said writ petition was

¶12

accordingly allowed with directions. Though, Ms. K. Sridevi, learned standing counsel for VUDA, seeks time to file a counter, in the light of the orders passed in similar matters earlier, this Court is of the opinion that the issue is squarely covered and does not require fresh adjudication.

¶13

3. For reasons alike as were mentioned in the above order, this writ petition is allowed directing the Sub-Registrar, Madhurawada, to receive and process the documents presented by the petitioners in respect of the Plot Nos.6, 7, 16, 17, 18 & 29 of Rishikonda village, Visakhapatnam in LP No.36/2009 in Sy.No.34/1, without reference to the letter dated 12.04.2012 issued by the VUDA. In the event the documents presented are found to fulfill the requirements of the Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, the SubRegistrar, Madhurawada, shall complete the registration formalities and release the documents in accordance with the due procedure. WP MP No.33092 of 2013 shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs.

¶14

________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J

¶15

Date: 13.09.2013. BSS

Sri.K.Sundara Rama Raju, v. Sub-Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.K.Sundara Rama Raju, v. 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

Dasari , Paidikalava Chinna Venkataiah Vs The Joint Sub Registrar

Kandimalla Pramachand, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Mohammed Fasiullah Vs The A.P. State Wakf Board, Rep by its Chief Executive Office

Baddi Ramana, S/o Musalayya Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep By its District Collector

Baipalli Survanarayana Vs The State rep. by its Principle Secretary, (Revenue)

M/s. Paramatma Cottons Private Limited, Vs Andhra Pradesh Northern Power Distribution Co., Ltd.