Allowed

Sunkara Lakshmi, W/o. Krishna Rao, aged 50 years, v. Sub-Registrar, Chirala Town and Mandal, Prakasam District.

Telangana HC3 Apr 2014WP/10225/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the demand for a No Objection Certificate from Revenue Authorities for property registration. The court directed the Sub-Registrar to register compliant documents without the NOC but to record reasons in writing if refusal is warranted.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Sub-Registrar to receive and process the document without insisting on a No Objection Certificate and register it if it fulfills statutory requirements; to pass written orders with reason

Sunkara Lakshmi, W/o. Krishna Rao, aged 50 years, Vs… — 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.10225 of 2014

¶6

Between:

¶7

Sunkara Lakshmi, W/o. Krishna Rao, Aged 50 years, Occ: Household, R/o. Door No.5-1, Etidibba, Thotavaripalem Village, Chirala Mandal, Prakasam District. AND

¶8

.. Petitioner

¶9

Sub-Registrar, Chirala Town & Mandal, Prakasam District & 3 others

¶10

.. Respondents

¶11

The Court made the following:

¶12

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶13

WRIT PETITION No.10225 of 2014

¶14

ORDER:

¶15

In this writ petition, the only grievance of the petitioner is with regard to the insistence by the registering authorities on production of ‘No Objection Certificate’ (NOC) from the Revenue Authorities as a condition precedent for receiving and registering the document presented by her for registration in connection with immovable property.

¶16

2. When the matter is taken up for consideration, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue submit that the subject matter to the extent of No Objection Certificate is squarely covered by the decision of Division Bench in W.A.No.1653 of 2013. With the consent of both the learned counsel, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. Learned counsel for petitioner also submits that the land in issue is not assigned to Ex-Servicemen.

¶17

3. Considering the submissions of both the learned counsel, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Sub-Registrar, Chirala Town & Mandal, Prakasam District (1^st respondent) to receive and process the document presented by the petitioner without insisting upon such NOC and in the event the document presented fulfils the requirements of the Registration Act, 1908, and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, he shall register and release the document in accordance with the due procedure. However, if the 1^st 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, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed.

¶18

JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶19

Date: 3^rd April, 2014 KL

¶20

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶21

WRIT PETITION No.10225 of 2014

¶22

Date: 3^rd April, 2014

¶23

Sunkara Lakshmi, W/o. Krishna Rao, aged 50 years, v. Sub-Registrar, Chirala Town and Mandal, Prakasam District.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunkara Lakshmi, W/o. Krishna Rao, aged 50 years, v. Sub-Registrar, Chirala Town and Mandal, Prakasam District.

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

M/s Saravana Turning works, Vs The Government of A.P rep by its Secretary

Y.T.Ramakrishna Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

S. Konda Reddy, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

H.Mylarappa, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its

Cholleti Purushotaham Chary, Vs The State of A.P

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