Disposed

T. Murlidhar v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC21 Apr 2014WP/9938/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition by directing registration authorities to process documents for specific plots associated with the petitioners without requiring a No Objection Certificate from the Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, relying on a prior judgment. Registration is to be completed if the documents meet statutory requirements.

What did the court decide?

Directing registration authorities to entertain and process the petitioners' documents for the specified plots without insisting for No Objection from the Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board.

T. Murlidhar Vs State of Andhra Pradesh — 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.9938 of 2014

¶6

Between:

¶7

T. Muralidhar, S/o. T. Venkat Ramana, Aged about 44 years, Occ: Business, R/o. 6-262, Bhajantri Street Old Pet Palmaner, Chittoor District & 5 others

¶8

.. Petitioners

¶9

AND

¶10

State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 5 others

¶11

.. Respondents

¶12

The Court made the following:

¶13

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶14

WRIT PETITION No.9938 of 2014

¶15

ORDER:

¶16

Both the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the 6^th respondent - Wakf Board represented that the subject matter of this writ petition is covered by a decision rendered by this Court in W.P.Nos.12412 and 12875 of 2013.

¶17

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that same proceedings which are assailed in this writ petition were challenged in the said writ petition and this Court held that all the proceedings are not valid in law.

¶18

3. For the reasons alike and recording the submissions of both the learned counsels, this Writ Petition is disposed of. The registration authorities are directed to entertain and process the documents presented by the petitioners vide Endorsement Nos.7 of 2014, dated 10.03.2014, 62 of 2013, dated 22.02.2014, 61 of 2013, dated 22.02.2014, 1 of 2014, dated 26.02.2014, 60 of 2013, dated 27.01.2014, and 6 of 2014, dated 06.03.2014, in respect of the property of the first petitioner bearing Plot Nos.50, 51 and 53 in Survey No.963/2, second petitioner bearing Plot No.28 in Survey No.963/3A, third petitioner bearing Plot No.28 in Survey No.963/1A, fourth petitioner bearing Plot No.39 in Survey No.963/1, 5^th petitioner bearing Plot No.48 in Survey No.963 and

¶19

6^th petitioner bearing Plot No.78 in Survey No.963/5A, situated at Palamaner Village and Mandal, Chittoor District, without insisting for No Objection from the Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board to the effect that the said land is Wakf property. In the event the documents are found to fulfill the requirements of Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, the registration authorities shall complete the registration formalities and release the documents in accordance with the due procedure. 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.9938 of 2014

¶24

Date: 3^rd April, 2014

¶25

T. Murlidhar v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T. Murlidhar 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aetigadda Peddanna Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Maddisetti Venkateswarlu, Vs The Government of India

Smt. Kambampati Mahalakshmi, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Mandem Srinivasulu Vs State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Jeeru Venkata Narasimham, S/o.late Suryanarayana Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

M/s. Elite Consultancy Vs Employees State Insurance Corporation