Allowed

A.Lakshmi Nagamani, W/o. Late a.Sivaramaiah v. The Government of A.P.

Telangana HC28 Apr 2014WP/13445/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the Supreme Court of India's predecessor (Andhra Pradesh High Court) held that revenue entries noting land as gramakantam do not permit unilateral refusal of registration. The Court directed the Sub-Registrar to process the document if it satisfies statutory requirements under the Registration and Stamp Acts.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Sub-Registrar to receive and process the petitioner's document for registration without reference to revenue records entries, subject to fulfillment of statutory requirements under the Re

A.Lakshmi Nagamani, W/o. Late… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN

¶3

Present

¶4

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶5

WRIT PETITION No.13445 of 2014

¶6

Between:

¶7

A. Lakshmi Nagamani, W/o. Late A. Sivaramaiah, Hindu, Aged about 38 years, R/o. Bhanumukkala Village, Banaganapalle Mandal, Kurnool District.

¶8

.. Petitioner

¶9

AND

¶10

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

¶11

.. Respondents

¶12

The Court made the following:

¶13

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶14

WRIT PETITION No.13445 of 2014

¶15

ORDER:

¶16

The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of house bearing Door No.15/151, in Survey No.81/1A1 of Bhanumukkala Village, Banaganapalle Nagar Panchayat and Mandal, Kurnool District. Due to personal needs, the petitioner wants to dispose of the said property. He submitted an application on 11.12.2013 to the Sub-Registrar, Banaganapalle Nagar Panchayat and Mandal, Kurnool District (5^th respondent) for the purpose of Market Value Certificate. The 5^th respondent instead of issuing the Market Value Certificate, issued an endorsement in Annexure-II, dated 11.12.2013, stating that the property covered by Survey No.81/1A1 of Bhanumukkala village is prohibited property. Aggrieved thereby, this writ petition is instituted.

¶17

2. The petitioner placed reliance on the decision of this Court in W.P.No.17917 of 2013 concerning the same survey number. This Court disposed of the Writ Petition after hearing the Government Pleader, who submitted instructions furnished by the Tahsildar, Banaganapalle. It is represented on behalf of the Government that the land is noted as poramboke (gramakantam)

¶18

in the Resurvey and Settlement Register (RSR) of Bhanumukkala Village and, therefore, cannot be registered. The said objection was over ruled in the above judgment. This Court held as under:

¶19

“that mere communication that the subject land is a gramakantam as per the revenue record has no real consequence. In the event there is a little dispute with regard to such land, the Government would necessarily have to assert and establish its title before the competent forum in accordance with law. It cannot unilaterally prohibit registration of documents in respect of such land basing on such revenue entries”.

¶20

3. For the reasons alike, this Writ Petition is also disposed of directing the Sub-Registrar, Banaganapalle Nagar Panchayat and Mandal, Kurnool District (5^th respondent) to receive and process the document presented by the petitioner in respect of the house bearing Door No.15/151, in Survey No.81/1A1 of Bhanumukkala Village, Banaganapalle Nagar Panchayat and Mandal, Kurnool District, without reference to the entries in the revenue records. In the event the document presented is found to fulfill the requirements of the Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, the Sub-Registrar, Banaganapalle, shall complete the registration formalities and release the document in accordance with the due procedure. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶21

_________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J

¶22

Date: 28^th April, 2014

¶23

¶24

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.13445 of 2014

¶26

Date: 28^th April, 2014

¶27

A.Lakshmi Nagamani, W/o. Late a.Sivaramaiah v. The Government of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Lakshmi Nagamani, W/o. Late a.Sivaramaiah v. The Government of A.P.

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

B.Saiprabha, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Pandraju Ashalatha Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Dr.Vikram Reddy Masani, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal

Arisetty Krishna Rao, S/o.late Seetharamayya, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Boggula Ramakka Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Lakkaenboina Sujatha Vs State of Andhra Pradesh