Disposed

K.Surender Goud v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC2 Dec 2022WP/11079/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Writ Petition No. 11079 of 2022, the High Court of Telangana disposed of a petition challenging the refusal to entertain a registration document for agricultural land. The court directed the Respondent No. 4 (Tahsildar/Sub-Registrar) to process the document in accordance with Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908, allowing for formal objections and reasons for refusal without deciding on the

What did the court decide?

Respondent No. 4 directed to process the subject document for registration in compliance with the Registration Act and Stamp Act, subject to formal objections and recording reasons for refusal under S

K.Surender Goud Vs The State of Telangana — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

[^32s6 ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER T\WO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶5

:PRESENT:

¶6

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO: 11079 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

K.Surender Goud, S/o.Mahadevudu, Occ. Farmar Rlo.1-111 Balijapally, Pammireddy pally, Ganpur Mandal, Wanaparthy District.

¶9

...Petitioner

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The District Collector, Wanaparthy District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Devarakadra Division, Wanaparthy District. 4. The Tahsildar and Joint Sub-Registrar, Devarakadra Mandal, Wanaparthy Districl.

¶13

...Responde nts

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No.4 in not entertaining the document for registration in respect of property to an extent of Ac 0.39 gts in Sy.No.271lU o'f Peruru Village, Devarakadra Mandal, l/ahabubnagar District inspite of payment of required registration charges and complied necessary formalities as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the Stamps and Registration Act and violation of Article 14 and 300-4 of Indian Constitution and consequently direct the 4th respondent to complete the registration for above property.

¶15

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶16

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be^pleased to direct the 4th respondent to receive and^process the document for registration in relation to the property to an extent of Ac 0.39 gts in Sy.No.27llU of Peruru Village, Devarakadra Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.

¶17

lA NO: 2 OF 2022

¶18

Between:

¶19

'1 . K.Kaivalya, D/o. Srinivasulu Goud, Occ: R:/o H.No.2-78, Devarkadra Mandal, Perur, IVlahaboob Nagar.

¶20

K.lswarya, D/o Srinivasulu Goud, Occ Rlo 2-107, Old Bazar, Wanaparthy, lt/ahaboob Nagar District.

¶21

...Petitioners/

¶22

Proposed 5th & 6th respondents

¶23

AND

¶24

1 K.Surender Goud, S/o.l,4ahadevudu, Occ. Farmar No.1-111 Balijapally, Pammireddy pally, Ganpur l,4andal, Wanaparthy District.

¶25

...Petitioner/Respondent

¶26

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶27

The District Collector, Wanaparthy District.

¶28

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Devarakadra Division, Wanaparthy District.

¶29

The Tahsildar and Joint Sub-Registrar, Devarakadra Mandal, Wanaparthy District-

¶30

...Respondents/Respondents

¶31

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit us, to implead ;as respondents 5 & 6 in the above writ petition in the interests of^justice and equity.

¶32

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. TERA RAJINIKANTH REDDY

¶33

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 4: GP FOR STAMPS AND REGISTRATION (TG)

¶34

Counsel forthe Respondent No.5 & 6: SRI c VASANTHA RAYUDU (SC)

¶35

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶36

¶37

¶38

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.11O79 of 2O22

¶39

ORDER:

¶40

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Sri G. Vasantha Rayudu, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.5 and 6.

¶41

The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that in spite of receiving the subject docunrent for registration in respect of the agriculture land admeasuring Ac.0.39 guntas in Survey No.27llU of Peruru Village, Devarakadra Mandal, Mahabubnagar District, respondent No.4 kept the said document pending on the ground that respondent Nos.S and 6 have raised an objection for registration of the said document.

¶42

The Tahsildar, respondent No.4 herein, is discharging the duties and functions as a Sub Registrar in respect of agricultural lands for registration and he is equally bound by the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short, 'the Act, 1908'). In view of the specific mandate under the Act, 1908, respondent No.4 is under obligation to process the subject document that is received by him for registration and pass appropriate orders in accordance with lad.

¶43

¶44

Learned counscl appearing Ior respondent Nos.s and 6 has -. raised an objection before respondent No.4 and the same is pending consideration beforc him. 5. The learned Government Pleader has stated that the respondents will fol1ow the procedure conternplated under Section 71 of the Regist.ration Act, 1908.

¶45

Section 71 of the Act rcads as follows:

¶46

Reasons for refusal to register to be recorded.-

¶47

(1) Dvery Sub-Registrar refusing to registcr a document, except on the ground that thc property to r.rhich it relates is not situated within his sub-district shall make an order of refusal and recorded his reasons for such order in hrs Book No.2, and endorse the words "registration refused" on the document; and, on application madc by any person executing or claiming under the document, sha-ll, without payment and unnecessar5r delay, give him a copy of the reasons so recorded.

¶48

(2) No registering ofhcer shal1 accept for registration a document so endorsed unless and until, under thc provisions hereinafter contained, the document is directed to be registered.

¶49

In view of the provision under Section 71 of the Act, 1908, this writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.4 to process the subject document for registration, subject to the petitioner complying with the provisions of the Act, 19O8 as well as the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. It will be open to the Registering Authority to refuse the document presented before him, if he has any objection, by duly assigning reasons in support of such decision and communicate the said decision to the petitioner. It is open to respondent Nos.S and 6 to raise objections, if any, for -/

¶50

reglstration of the subject document and if any objections are raised by respondent them, the same shall be considered bv respondent No.4, while processing the document presented by the petitioner for registration. It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case as to the entitlement of the petitioner to get the subject document registered. There shall no order as to costs.

¶51

Miscellaneous^petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶52

SDi.L.S PARVATHI ASSISTA ISTRAR

¶53

//TRUE COPY//

¶54

S FICER

¶55

To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, State of Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶56

The District Collector, Wanaparthy District.

¶57

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Devarakadra Division, Wanaparthy District.

¶58

The Tahsildar and Joint Sub-Registrar, Devarakadra Mandal, Wanaparthy District.

¶59

One CC to SRI TERA RAJINIKANTH REDDY Advocate IOPUC]

¶60

One CC to SRl. c VASANTHA RAYUDU, Standing Counsel tOiUCl

¶61

Two CCs to GP FOR STAIVPS AND REGISTRATION (TG), High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

¶62

B. Two CD Copies

HIGH COURT

MSK.J

DATED:0211212O22

ORDER

i I..riE a: t
t1
23 rti ?$I2

¶68

WP. No.1 1 079 of 2022

¶69

WRIT PETITION IS DISI'OSED OF WITHOUT COST

K.Surender Goud v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Surender Goud v. The State of Telangana

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

Samineni Swarajyam, Vs The State of Telangana

Mrs. Arifa Begum Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others

Sri Vivekananda Desai Vs The State of Telangana

Weldflux India Limited Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Kala Praful Jain Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Moodu Aruna Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh