Allowed

Vuddhagiri Vaasavi Devi, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by The Principal, Secretary

Telangana HC3 Apr 2014WP/10116/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the refusal to register a document relating to shared properties, which the sub-registrar termed government poramboke. Relying on a prior order accepting ecclesiastical ownership for part of the land, the High Court directed the authority to process the document subject to statutory requirements or refuse in writing under Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Sub-Registrar, Salur, to receive and process the document; to complete registration if requirements are met or to deny in writing under Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908.

Vuddhagiri Vaasavi Devi, Vs The State of Andhra… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN

¶3

Present

¶4

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶5

WRIT PETITION No.10116 of 2014

¶6

Between:

¶7

Vuddhagiri Vaasavi Devi, W/o.Vuddhagiri Annam Raju Gupta, Aged about 45 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Telaga Street, Salur Village and Municipality, Vizianagaram District.

¶8

.. Petitioner

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Principal Secretary, Registration & Stamps (Revenue) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 4 others

¶11

.. Respondents

¶12

The Court made the following:

¶13

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶14

WRIT PETITION No.10116 of 2014

¶15

ORDER:

¶16

The petitioner assails the action of the registration authorities in refusing to receive the document presented by her in respect of half share in the properties of Sree Rama Modern Rice Mill, and vacant site, and machinery in Old D.No.20-84 and new D.No.20-3188, New Ward No.2, in Survey No.159/2, Dabbi Street and Dhandigama Road East, Salur

¶17

Village and Municipality, Vizianagaram District. The reason for the refusal is when the petitioner approached the Sub-Registrar, Salur, Vizianagaram District (3^rd respondent) for registration of the document, he stated that the subject land is a Government poramboke and was, therefore, not amenable to transactions between private parties.

¶18

2. The land in this survey number fell for consideration before this Court in W.P. No.23634 of 2012. A copy of the order, dated 26.11.2012, passed therein is placed on record and reflects that part of the subject land in this survey number was sold in a court auction prior to 1971 and, therefore, the claim of the Government that the entire land in this survey number belonged to it was not accepted. The writ petition was, accordingly, disposed of directing the registration authorities to proceed with the registration of documents in respect of this land in accordance with law.

¶19

3. For reasons alike, as were mentioned in the order, dated 26.11.2012, passed by this Court in W.P. No.23634 of 2012, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the SubRegistrar, Salur, Vizianagaram District (3^rd respondent) to receive and process the document presented by the petitioner in respect of the subject land. In the event the said document is found to fulfil the requirements of the Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, the 3^rd respondent shall complete the registration formalities and release the document in accordance with the due procedure. If, however, the 3^rd respondent is of the opinion that the document presented for registration warrants denial, he shall pass orders in writing indicating the reasons for such refusal and communicate the same to the party in accordance with Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending in this writ petition, if any, shall stand closed.

¶20

JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶21

Date: 3^rd April, 2014 KL

¶22

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.10116 of 2014

¶24

Date: 3^rd April, 2014

¶25