Disposed

Sudi Reddy Srinivas Reddy and anothr v. The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Telangana HC9 Feb 2021WP/1423/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner challenged the registering authority's refusal to accept documents for land registration under Section 71 of the Registration Act without assigning reasons. The Court directed the authority to receive and process the documents, noting that mere registration does not confer title and leaving open future objections with proper reasons.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Registering Authority to receive and process the subject documents, subject to petitioners complying with the Indian Registration Act.

Sudi Reddy Srinivas Reddy and anothr Vs The State… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T,AMARNATH GOUD

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 1423 OF 2021

¶8

Between:

¶9

1 Sudi Reddy Srinivas Reddy, S/o Govardan Reddy, Aqed about 53 vears, Occ: Business FJo H No 10-3-59714, Vivekananda puri,^-Karimnagar, karimnagar District

¶10

2 Kolanu Raja Ram Reddy, S/o Kista Reddy, Aged about 59 years, Occ: Business Rl/o.Plot No 148, H No 1-9-32l2/A, Road No 1, Lahe No 21 , R^avindranagar Colony, Street No 8, SR Apartments, Habsiguda Hyderabad - 50Ci 007.

¶11

(C.T is amended as per Court Order dt 12-07-2021 in LA No 2/2021 )

¶12

...P ETITIONERS

¶13

AND

¶14

The State of Telangana, tep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue, Registration and Stamps Department, Secretariat buildings, Hyderbbad

¶15

The District Registrar of Assurances, Registiation and Stamps Department

¶16

Kari mnagar Town and District Karimnaqar, Telanqana

¶17

The Ta hsildar, Kotha pa lly I/andal, Ka rimna ga r Di-strict 4. The Tahsildar/Mandal Rtivenue Officer, Kothapally Revenue Mandal Karimnagar Dist rict.

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAlvus by declaring the action of the 3'd respondent in refusing to receive the documents presented by the petitioner for registration in respect of land to an extent ol Ac.2-25 Gts situated in sy No 131 of Rekurthy Village and Gram panchayat, Kothapally Mqn!.al, Karimnagar District without assigning any reason as being'illegal, without jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions sec 71(1)(2) of the Regi-strati6n Act and consequently direct the 3'o respondent to receive the documents presented by the petitioner for registration of land to an extent ol Ac.2-2s Gts situated in sy trto iet or Rekurthy Village and Gram panchayat, Kothapaily Mandar, Karimnagar District

¶20

IAN :1OF 021

¶21

Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the fuigi court may be preased to direcithe 3d respondent to receive forthwith and registerlhe document presented for registration by lhe netitioner in respect of rand to a-n extent oiac.z-2s Gts srtuateoln di No rer of Rekurthy Vi age and Gram.panchayrt, koinrprffy fulandal, Xrnr*rgri Dirtri.t, pending disposal of the writ petition

¶22

Counsel for the petitioner: SRI S.RAVINDER REDDY

¶23

"counset for the Respondents: Gp FoR srAMps AND REGrsrRATroN

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{T.AMARNATHGOUD}

¶26

Writ Petition No.1423 of^2O2L

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

This Writ Petition is filed by^{the petitioners vrith the prayer} which reads as follou's:-

¶29

"to issue an order or^{direction more particularly one in the} the acticn of the 3r'l pre:;ented by tl-re petitioners for registration ln extent of Ac.2.25Gts., situate(l in^{Sy.No.131of Rekurthy Villalle and Cram} istrict u,'ithout assigning any reason as^beingillegal sdiction and contrary to the Provisions^{Sec.71(1)(2)of the RegistrationAct and} consequently direct the^{3'd respondentto recejl'e 1h': documents} presented by the petitioners^{for registration.'}

¶30

Heard learned^{counsel for the petitioners and the learned} Government Pleader^{forStampsand Registration forthe} respondents.

¶31

3, The^{grievanceof the petitioners is that the respondent} authorities^are rvithout assigning any reasons^{u'hich is contraryto the Provisions of Sec 71(1)12) of the} reBistration. sto receive

¶32

On the^{other hand, learnedGovt' Pleader' on instructions'} rvouldsubmitthatthesubjectlandsareceilingsurplur;landsandso are to said documer.ts.

¶33

The^{procedure contemplatedunder Section 7l of the} Registration^{Act, 1908, readsas follows:}

¶34

Reasons^{for refusal to register to be recorded---}

¶35

¶36

(l)Every Sub-Registrar refusing to register a document, except on the ground that the property to which it relates is not situated within his sub-district shall make an order of refusal and recorded his reasons for such order in his Book No.2, and endorse the words" registration refused" on the document; ald on application made by any person executing or claiming under the document, shall, without payment and unnecessal/ delay, gve him a copy of the reasons so recorded.

¶37

(2) No registering officer shall accept for registration of a document so endorsed unless and until, under the provisions hereinafter contained, the document is directed to be registered.

¶38

In view of the above submissions made by both the parties coupled with the provision of Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Registering Authority to receive and process the subject documents, subject to the petitioners complying with the provisions of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, and the Indian Stamps Act, 1899. It will be open to the Registering Authority to refuse/receive the documents presented before him, if he has any other objection, by duly assigning reasons in support of such decision and communicate the said decision to the petitioner. It is made clear that mere registration of document does not confer title to the property. It is a-lso made clear that this order does not preclude the Government/ District Collector to take appropriate steps as warranted by law and to assert its title.

¶39

Miscellaneous^petitions pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

¶40

T9TF: -T-hat^{the CauseTifle of Respondent} No. 2 in the Order date.d 09.02.2021 in W.p.No..t423 bf ZoZr ,"f,i"i"t"';;; ii.riif^{1:ft",:l+;"i:ff3#ii:.:"[:J]r,.:i]xs5:x} rnrs amended order shall suhstitute the earlier orOer which has already been dispatched on 22.02-2021

¶41

SO/. K.VENKAIAH ,/ ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ./'

¶42

SO/-K.VENKAIAH ASSTSTANI_REGTSTRAR L.r) SECTION OFFICER

¶43

//TRUE COPY'

¶44

¶45

33:':[?iJ?31.,rt"fi"1]il;,ft?li2'r"^{Resistration and stampsDepartment, State or reransana}

¶46

¶47

The District Registrar of Assurances, Registration and Starnps Department Karimnagar Town and District Karimnagar, Telangana

¶48

The Tahsildar, Kothapally Mandal, Karimnagar District

¶49

The Tahsildar/Mandal Revenue Officer, Kothapally Revenue Mandal Karimnagar District.

¶50

One CC to Sri S.Ravinder Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Stamps and Registration, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶51

Two CD Copies

¶52

One Spare Copy. Kj. \

¶53

>P€."

¶54

( (

¶55

HIGH COURT

¶56

DATED:09/02/202't 1210712021

¶57

AMENDED ORDER

¶58

WP.No.1423 of 2021

¶59

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION wrTHouT COSTS.

¶60

'iliu
o
c
,
t*
_$
6
ltJ
r$
O
'J-
<br>I *

Sudi Reddy Srinivas Reddy and anothr v. The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudi Reddy Srinivas Reddy and anothr v. The State of Telangana and 3 Others

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

P. Dattadri Vs The State of Telangana

R.Prasad , R.v.Sai Prasad and Another Vs State of Telangana and 2 Others

R.Prasad , R.v.Sai Prasad Vs State of Telangana

Sirikonda Vijaya Lakshmi Vs The State of Telangana, And 3 Others

Putti Prasad Vs The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Putti Soujanya Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others