Smt. Tumuku Satyavathi v. The Sub - Registrar
Case brief
What is this about?
The court examined the petitioner's version claiming fraud by a co-respondent and failure to cancel sale deeds. Upon noting that the 1st respondent had implemented the previous order by canceling documents via encumbrance statement updates, the court held no further orders were needed and closed the petition.
What did the court decide?
No orders as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions in this writ shall stand closed.
What the court decided
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO
WP.No.28558 of 2012
ORDER :
Heard the counsel for petitioner, and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, for respondents.
2. The 4th respondent herein had earlier filed WP.No.21741 of 2010 before this Court challenging the refusal of 1st respondent in registering sale deeds in respect of plot admeasuring 700 Sq.Yds. in Survey No.88 Part covered under Block No.1, situate at Petbasheerabad, Quthbullapur Mandal and Municipality, Ranga Reddy District, allegedly belonging to her.
3. Initially, on 10.11.2010, in the said Writ Petition, this Court directed the 1st respondent to receive and register sale deeds in respect of the said land stating specifically that it would be subject to the result of the Writ Petition.
4. Ultimately, the said Writ Petition came to be dismissed on 24.04.2012, granting liberty to the 4th respondent to approach the competent Civil Court for remedy.
5. The petitioner has therefore filed the present Writ Petition stating that in spite of the said interim order specifically stating that the registration, if any, would be subject to the result of the Writ Petition and that the said Writ Petition being subsequently dismissed,
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the grievance of the petitioner regarding the failure to cancel the impugned sale deeds is still subsisting after the implementation of the previous order date 24.04.2012.
Whether further orders are required in the present writ petition since the previous relief has been effectively implemented.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Petitioner
- respondent
1st Respondent
- respondent
2nd Respondent
- respondent
4th Respondent
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Telangana HC
- Decided on
- · April
- Registered
- Case no.
- WP/28558/2012
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court