Allowed

N.Narayanamma, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC9 Jul 2014WP/18942/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, petitioners challenged the Sub-Registrars refusal to entertain their sale deeds for certain lands. The Court held the refusal was against law and directed the Sub-Registrar to either register the documents or communicate specific reasons for denial based on legal requirements.

What did the court decide?

The Sub-Registrar directed to examine the documents and register them if they conform to the Registration Act, otherwise pass an appropriate order stating reasons for refusal.

N.Narayanamma, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

¶5

WRIT PETITION No.18942 of 2014

¶6

BETWEEN

¶7

N. Narayamma and others.

¶8

... PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Revenue, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.

¶11

...RESPONDENTS

¶12

Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. CHALLA SIVA SANKAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE (AP)

¶13

The Court made the following:

¶14

ORDER:

¶15

Heard.

¶16

2. The grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition is that the fourth respondent, Sub-Registrar, is not entertaining to register the sale deeds presented by the petitioners with respect to lands admeasuring Ac.5.93

¶17

cents; Ac.3.00 cents; Ac.3.50 cents and Ac.3.50 cents respectively in Sy.No.86 at Vamasamudram village,

¶18

H/o. Tadakanapalli, Kallur Mandal, Kurnool District. Petitioners claim that they are in possession and enjoyment of the said lands since 1997 and that the aforesaid lands are not Government lands and there is no notification under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908. In view of that, the action of the fourth respondent is impugned in this writ petition.

¶19

3. The relief sought for in the present writ petition is covered by a Division Bench judgment of this Court, to which I am a party,

¶20

[1] in G. NARASIAH v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH . The same issue was also considered in another decision of this Court in WP.No.17092 of 2014 dated 24.06.2014.

¶21

4. Following the aforesaid decisions of this Court, the action of the fourth respondent, Sub-Registrar, in refusing to entertain the documents presented by the petitioners is clearly against law as it is impermissible for the SubRegistrar to refuse to receive the document presented and process it for registration. The Sub-Registrar shall, therefore, examine the document presented and if found to be in conformity with requirements of the Registration Act and the Rules, register the same or otherwise pass appropriate order on the touchstone of law governing the field. However, if the document presented by the petitioners warrants denial and cannot be admitted to registration, the reasons for refusal shall be communicated to the petitioners.

¶22

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶23

_____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J

¶24

July 9, 2014

¶25

DSK

¶26

[1] 2011 (3) ALT 415 (DB)

N.Narayanamma, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Narayanamma, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

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

Mandla Guramma W/o. Raosanna Vs The Revenue Divisional officer, Jammalamadugu

Annapaneni Appa Rao, S/o. Suryanarayana, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its District Collector

M/s Jana Chaitanya Housing Ltd. Vs The Govt. of A.P

Kunduri Gopamma Vs The Government of Telangana

Batchali Varalakshmi Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Principal Secretary

S.v.Narasinga Rao, Vs The District Collector