Dismissed

Chava Srirami Reddy v. The Joint Collector and Additional District Magistrate

Telangana HC1 Nov 2013WP/31311/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging orders denying a petitioner rights to a land pattadar passbook and title deed based on an unregistered sale deed, the single-judge High Court upheld the lower authorities' decision. Relying on mandatory registration provisions for property above 100 rupees and Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908, the Court dismissed the petition but granted liberty to the petiti

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition dismissed; liberty granted to file a civil suit under Section 8(2) of the AP Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971; interim petition disposed of as infructuous.

Chava Srirami Reddy Vs The Joint Collector and… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.31311 of 2013

¶2

Date: 01.11.2013

¶3

Between:

¶4

Chava Srirami Reddy

¶5

.. Petitioner

¶6

and The Joint Collector and Additional District Magistrate, Ananthapur and others

¶7

.. Respondents

¶8

Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri N.Ranga Reddy

¶9

Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2: Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue

¶10

Counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4: --

¶11

ORDER:

¶12

This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to set aside the order in Rc.No.D4/13645/2011 dated 25.06.2013 of respondent No.1, whereby he has confirmed the order in D.Dis.D2/2257/2009 dated 08.08.2011 of respondent No.2.

¶13

The petitioner and respondent Nos.3 and 4 are the brothers. Based on a purported unregistered sale deed stated to have been executed by respondent No.4 on 21.05.1999, the petitioner has approached the Tahsildar for issue of pattadar passbook and title deed in respect of Acs.1.66 cents of land and obtained the same. Feeling aggrieved by the same, both respondent Nos.3 and 4 filed an appeal before respondent No.2, who by his order dated 08.08.2011 allowed the same. The revision petition filed by the petitioner against the said order was dismissed by respondent No.1 on 25.06.2013. Questioning both these orders, the petitioner filed this writ petition.

¶14

A perusal of the order of respondent No.2 shows that the main ground on which he has allowed the appeal filed by respondent Nos. 3 and 4 was that the petitioner has not acquired title to the land in question as he has claimed his right only on the basis of an unregistered sale deed. This reasoning was confirmed in the revision petition by respondent No.1.

¶15

Under the provisions of Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short ‘the Act’), sale in respect of the property of the value of Rs.100/- and above is liable to be compulsorily registered.

¶16

Under Section 49 of the Act, no document required by Section 17 of the Act or by any provision of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, to be registered shall affect any immovable property comprised therein, except to the extent of the purposes mentioned in the proviso thereof.

¶17

In view of the above admitted legal position, respondent No.2 is justified in allowing the appeal filed by respondent Nos.3 and 4 and

¶18

therefore, no exception can be taken to the orders of respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

¶19

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed, however, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent civil Court under Section 8(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 by filing a civil suit. It is made clear that the observations made in this writ petition shall not affect the petitioner’s interests in the event such a civil suit is filed and the civil Court shall decide the suit without being influenced by the observations made by this Court in this order or in the impugned orders.

¶20

As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.38894 of 2013 filed by the petitioner for interim relief shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

¶21

_____________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 01^st November, 2013 GHN

Chava Srirami Reddy v. The Joint Collector and Additional District Magistrate

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chava Srirami Reddy v. The Joint Collector and Additional District Magistrate

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

Sri Samdurala Venu Gopal Rao, Vs The Govt., of A.P.

Sanjeevarayudu Boya S/o.Naganna, Vs The Assistant Project Director Dwama Kurnool

Sri Bobbara Sundara Rao, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal

Rapolu Venugopal Rao, S/o. Venkatarajaiah Vs The State of A.P.

B.Poornachandra Reddy Vs TheDistrict Collector ANDMagistrate

Qazi Mohammed Ahsan Uzzaman Qureshi, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh