Disposed

Gunda Vijaya Kumar Reddy, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC16 Jul 2014WP/19803/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought to register a sale deed for land. The Sub-Registrar refused registration, stating the land was government land. The Court clarified that without a notification under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, the refusal was unjustified.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to present the Sale Deed; upon presentation, the Sub-Registrar shall process, object, or register it per statutory requirements.

Gunda Vijaya Kumar Reddy, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

¶2

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN

¶4

Present

¶5

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.19803 of 2014

¶7

Between:

¶8

Gunda Vijaya Kumar Reddy, S/o. Mara Reddy, Aged 44 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Kummarapalli Village, Nandalur Mandal and Post, Rajampet Taluk, Kadapa District.

¶9

.. Petitioner

¶10

AND

¶11

State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Registration) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 2 others

¶12

.. Respondents

¶13

The Court made the following:

¶14

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶15

WRIT PETITION No.19803 of 2014

¶16

ORDER:

¶17

The case of the petitioner is that one Sri Chokkaraju Subba Rama Raju has purchased land to an extent of Ac. 4.52 cents in Survey No.829/2, situated at Nagireddypalle Village, Nandalur Mandal, Kadapa District, on 15.10.1973 from Smt. Suraparaju Subbamma vide document No.3747 of 1973. The said Chokkaraju Subba Ramu Raju has expired on 10.04.2010 leaving three daughters and thereafter, the said property has been inherited to the said three daughters as legal heirs. Thus, the said legal heirs are the absolute owners and possessors and are in continuous possession and enjoyment of the said land. For personal and domestic requirement, the legal heirs of Chokkaraju Subba Rama Raju intended to alienate the said land and the petitioner has come forward to purchase the said land and paid the entire sale consideration to the said legal heirs and consequently approached the Sub-Registrar, Rajampet, Kadapa District (2^nd respondent) to register the Sale Deed. The 2^nd respondent informed the petitioner that the property in Survey No.829/2 is classified as Government land and, therefore, no Sale Deed can be entertained.

¶18

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the action of the 2^nd respondent is illegal. No notification is issued under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, and, therefore, the 2^nd respondent could not have rejected the request of the petitioner.

¶19

3. Apparently, so far the Sale Deed has not been presented before the Sub-Registrar, Rajampet, Kadapa District (2^nd respondent). The petitioner is given liberty to present the Sale Deed before the 2^nd respondent. On such presentation, the 2^nd respondent shall receive and process the said Sale Deed in accordance with the Registration Act, 1908, and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. If the 2^nd respondent is of the opinion that the property in Survey No.829/2 is prohibited for registration by any statutory notification, the 2^nd respondent shall pass appropriate orders and communicate the decision to the petitioner. If there is no such objection, he shall register the Sale Deed if the same is in accordance with the Registration Act, 1908, and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, and release the same.

¶20

4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed. 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: 16^th July, 2014 KL

¶23

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶24

WRIT PETITION No.19803 of 2014

¶25

Date: 16^th July, 2014

¶26

Gunda Vijaya Kumar Reddy, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gunda Vijaya Kumar Reddy, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

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

Chintala Suresh Kumar, S/o.Sri C.Subbanna, Vs The Indian Oil Corporation Limited

Mallu Padmalatha Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Principal

Sri Pendurthi Rangarao Vs The Tobacco Board Rep. by its Chairman Guntur

P. Raja Kiranmayee, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sudhakara Reddy Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

Rudrappa Gari Rudrappa, Vs The Govt. of A.P. Rep. by its Prl. Secretary