Disposed

Gangasani Sudarshan Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC5 Dec 2022WP/14556/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana disposed of a writ petition filed by a property seller seeking validation of an Agreement of Sale dated 18.12.2004. The District Registrar had rejected an office objection response, leaving the matter pending. The Court directed the Registrar to immediately consider the pending representation within eight weeks. Citations overlap subject matrices; constitutional review

What did the court decide?

Directed the District Registrar to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.02.2022 for validation of the Agreement of Sale and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks.

Gangasani Sudarshan Reddy Vs The State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR TTIE STATE OF TI]LANGANA ,-AT I{YI)EITAI]AD Z.

¶2

(Spccia I Original J u risdict ion )

¶3

MONDAY. TI IL I,'II,1 H DN Y OF I]LCEMI]LIT " TWO THOUSAND AND TWI]N'IY I'WO

¶4

[^32s6 ]

¶5

PRESEN't

¶6

THB HONOURAULE SrtI ,jUS'tI(rE Mfr{,ilNr..NI SUDI{EER KUMAIT -- WIIIT I'E'l'l'l lON NO: 14556 O!- 2022 ,-

¶7

Betrveen:

¶8

Gangasani Sudarshan Reddy. Sio.G.Sar'a Redcl),. occ Busincss, R/o. H.No.2-2-969, Burjugally, Amberpet, Hyderabad.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

l. The State ofrelangana, Rep. by its principal secretary, Stamps and Registration Department, Secretariat Buildings. BRKR Bhar..an, l'ank Bund, Hyderaf,ad.

¶12

The commissioner and Inspector Gencrar or Rcgistration and Stamps, M.J.Market, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

¶13

The District Registrar, Ranga Reddy l)istrict. I,rashanthi Nagar, Kukatpally, Hyderabad-72.

¶14

"'R-E'SPONDENTS /.

¶15

Petition under Article 226 ol' the c.nsritLrlio. ol- lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the alfidavit filecl rhcreuirh. rhe Iligh cou.i may-be pleased to issue an order; writ or direction nrorc parriurrl:ir l\ )r)c in rhe narurc ol' wrii of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3'd Rcspondcnr rn lailirrg trr e.lnr'U", the Representation of the Petitioner, Dr,24102/2022 for validation of' rlie Agrce menr ol Sale, Dt.l g- l2-2004 by receiving the necessary Fees and Stamp duty inspite of submitting all the Documents in format on 08/1012021 and 23llllz02l as illegal, irbirrarl.. un constitutional and contrary to the provisions of Indian stamp Act and !-onsequently direct the 3,d Respondent to forthwith initiate action for validating the Agriement oi Sale of the petitioner, Dt.1811212004 by receiving the necessary Fees and stamp dury pursuant the submission of the Application along with Documenrs on 0g/ I 0i 202 I and 23/l i tzozt ay duly considering the Representati on, Dt.24-02-2022;

¶16

IA NO: I OF 2022 /

¶17

Petition under Section l5l cPC praling that in the circumstances staled in the alfidavit filed in support ol the petition. thc lligh ('()urr nra) be pleased to direct the 3'd Rcspondent to forthwith validate the Aqrecnrcnr ol SlIle olthc petitioner. Dt. lg-12-2004 by receiving the necessary Fees antl slamp (liltv pLrrsLrant the submission ol the Application along with Documenrs on 0ll- 10-102 I and ll- I I -202 I by duly considering the llepresentation, Dt.24 -02-2022

¶18

(lounsel for thc Pctitioner : SRI. C' IIARI l,RIr[. l H

¶19

(lounsel for the Responde nts : (iP FOl,L S-I-.,\l I,S AND ItI,_(; IS-l'ltAl.lON (TG) -l'he Court made the follo* ing :

¶20

THE HON'ELE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.14556 of 2 o22

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps _and Registration.

¶23

The petitioner herein claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of plots bearing Nos.71, 62, 49, 80, 65 and 6T admeasuring 20O sq. yards each respectively in Survey Nos.202 to 206 and 225 to 229 situated at Pasmamla Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same under an agreement of sale dated 18.12.2004. It is also the case of the petitioner that he has paid the entire sale consideration under the said agreement ol sale and he has taken possession of the subject plots. It is rhe further case of the petitioner that the vendor of the petitioner has acquired the subject plots under registered document Nos 1 763/2O0 4, t7gt / 2OO4, LZ92 I 2004, t79A I 2OO4, 1803/2004 and 2124120O4. The petitioner, thus, having came into possession of the subject plots claims to have approached the offrce of respondent No.3 requesting for validation of the agreement of sale dated 18.12.2004 by submitting all the requisite documents in proper form. However, respondent No.3 stated to have raised ceitain office objections and in response thereto, the

¶24

¶25

petitioncr also claims to have complied with such objections and submitted the required documents on 23.1 l.2o2l. Further, according to thc petitioner, the said application is still pending before respondent No.3. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner claims to have submitted a representation dated 22.02.2022 before respondent No.3 and the said representation is also still pending consideration before respondent No.3. Hence, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for passing appropriate orders directing respondent No.3 to take immediate action on the representation dated 23.O2.2022 submitted by the petitioner.

¶26

A perusal of the material on record shows that the representation dated 23.02.2022 submitted by the petitioner is acknowledged by the ofhce of respondent No.3 on 24.02.2022. As contended by learned counsel for the petitioner, the said representation is still pending consideration before respondent No.3 and no orders have been passed thereon.

¶27

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration submitted that in case, if the representation submitted by the petitioner is stiil pending before respondent No.3, respondent No.3 shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law.

¶28

Taking into consideration the submissions made on either side, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.3 to take immediate steps for considering the representalion dated 23.02 .2022 submitted by the petitioner for validation of the agreement of sa-le dated 18.L2.2OO4 and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the dtrte of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the same to the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶29

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed

¶30

ANSART 'D/-M.HD.'ANA'LLAH ASSISTAN'I'ItE IS'I'ILAIt

//TRI]E COPY//

SF],C'TION r-FrcEt{

To,

l. The Principal^{Secretary, Stamps and RegisfationDepartment,StateoiTelangana,} Secretariat Buildings,^{BRKR Bhavaq Tank Bund,Hyderabad.}

¶35

¶36

The Commissioner^{and InspectorGenelal of RegistrationandStamps,M.J'Market,} Hydcrabad.^{Tclan gana State.}

¶37

The District^{Registrar, Ranga ReddyDistrict,PrashanthiNagar, Kukatpally,} Hyderabad-72.

¶38

One C(l to SRI.^Cl HARI^{PREETH Advocate} [OPUC]

¶39

Trvo CCs to^{(iP FOR STAMPSAND REGISTRATION (TG, High Courtfor the} State o lI'elangana. IOUT]

¶40

Trvo CD Copies

IIIGII COIJI{T

N{SK, J

DATED: 05112/2022

()RDIiR

WP.No.l4556 of 2022

WRIT PETITION IS DISPOSED OF WITITOU'I COSTS ffi,;

¶47

l 04 Jri /

Gangasani Sudarshan Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gangasani Sudarshan Reddy 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

Weldflux India Limited Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Kala Praful Jain Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

K.Surender Goud Vs The State of Telangana

Y. Narayan Reddy Vs The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

S. Shyam Sunder Reddy Vs R.Y. Venumadhava Rao and another

Gangasani Sudarshan Reddy Vs The State of Telangana