Disposed

Sri K. Raghavendra Lal v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC26 Apr 2022WP/18961/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana disposed of a writ petition challenging the refusal of a Sub-Registrar to acknowledge a sale deed. The court directed the authority to receive and process the document pursuant to Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908, subject to statutory compliance.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Registering Authority to receive and process the sale deed presented by the petitioner.

Sri K. Raghavendra Lal Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN^KUMAR

¶7

WRlT PETITION NO:^'18961 OF 2022

¶8

Between:

¶9

Sri K. Raghavendra Lal, S/o^{Sri K. Ivlohan Lal, Aged about 35 years,Occ.} Employee, Rl/o Flat No.302,^{1'1 1 Floor, D.N.26-1411114/302, Archana Apartments,} Sharada Nagar, I/alkajgiri,^{Medchal lvlalkajgiriDistrict, presently residing At} 14621 NE 37 PL, APT D-14, Bellevue,^{Washington -98007, USA.,rep. by his} SPA., Sri Rangesh Kumar Gubbala^{S/o Late G.V. Swami Naidu,Aged about 57} years, Occ. Self Employed, Ryo6-3-598/5111218'^{Plot No.343,Khairatabad,} Anand Nagnr; Colony, Hyderabad,^T.S.

¶10

..,PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, Rep. by^{its Principal Secretary,Stamps and} Regrstration Department, Secretariat^{Buildings,HLderabad.}

¶13

Thd Commissibner and lnspector^{Geneial (RegistrationandStamps),} Hyderabad.

¶14

The Sub Reqistrar, Sub Reqistrar, Ivlalkaigiri,^{N/alkajgiri,I/edchal-f\ilalkajgiri}

¶15

3 The Sub Reqistrar, Sub Reqistrar, Ivlalkaigiri,^{N/alkajgiri,I/edchal-f\ilalkajgiri} 4 The Telangina State W6kf^{Board,- rep. its ChiefExecutiveOfficer,Huz} House, Nampally, HYderabad.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article²²⁶ of^{lhe constitution of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the^{affidavit filed therewith,the High court may be} pleased to issue a writ, order or orders,^{more particularly a writ in the nature of} 'ti/andamus, declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in refusing to receive and ,.lirt.|. the sale^{dJed, presentedby the Petitionerin respectof flat bearing} No.302 in Third^{Floor,frrf rri.iprfOoo|. ko. 26-1 a1 -1 1 t4l302, admeasuring 81 0. Sft.'} 'pf built up area^including "ornrnin^{ut""and 81'00 Sft' Car parking Areain Archana} ilil: Aoartments, ffib,^{constructed ;;gtth;iii} ""^ill;b; "t^{N"t g/A tn"it and rn 3/B the in Municipal rand 2e'00 Sq Door Yards 'No'26'10712'or 24'24} Sq. tvltrs.,^{out of land uO'-"us"ing 480'00squarevards or 401 28 Sq Mts '} situated at^{Sharada N'g":'il;;;iliii'witno't in'ittino'Nlo obiectionCertificate'as} without^{jurisdiction'aroitrary lnJ'if"g'r'against the-Principlesof NaturalJustice} 6onstitution^{of lndia and consequentlv} and violates^{Article 14} ';J3ob:;;iihe direct^{the 3rd Respondeni'i"-;;i"; ;;Jgitt"' the sale deed presented bv the} Writ Petitioner.

¶18

../' lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶19

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 pleased to direct the 3rd Respondent to receive and register the safe deed presented by Petitioner in respect of the Flat bearing No.302 in Third Floor, Municipal Door No. 26-141-11141302, admeasuring 810 Sft., builtup area including common areas and 81.00 Sft. Car parking Area in Archana Apartments, constructed on plot Nos. 3/A and 3/B in Municipal Door No. 26-10712, in Sy. No.46, together with undivided share in the land 29.00 Sq. Yards or 24.24 Sq. Mtrs., out of land admeasuring 480.00 square yards or 401.28 Sq. Mts., situated al Sharada Nagar, Malkajgiri, within the limits of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, during the pendency of the above Writ Petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRl. N GANGADHAR Counsel for the Respondents No. 1 to 3 : GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the.R.espondents No.4: SRl. ABUAKRAM SC FOR WALF BOARD The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶22

!rRIT PETITION No.18967 of 2O22

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

Heard the leamed counself or the petitioner,^leamed

¶25

Govemment Pleader for^{Revenue appearingfor respondents1 to} 3 and Sri Abu Akram,^{leamed StandlngCourselaPpearing for} respondent No.4. \X/ith their^{consent, this writ petition is disposed} of at the threshold.

¶26

fhe-niain grievance of^{the petitioneris that respondent No.3} is refusing to receive,^{registerand releasethe documentspresented} by the petitioner in^respect of^{the subjectproPerty pertainingto} Flat bearing No.3O2 in 3d^{floor, MunicipalDoor No.26-} t4t/l/4/302, admeasuring^{810 sft, in Survey No.46,situated at} Sharada Nagar,^Malkajgiri.

¶27

The leamed Govemment^{Pleader for Revenue submitted} that the official respondents^{witl follow the procedure} contemplated under^{Section7l of the RegistrationAct, 1908'}

¶28

4 Section 7l of^{theRegistrationAct,1908 (for short 'the Act)} reads as follows:

¶29

*rt-\ W.P. o.l896l^of

¶30

¶31

"71. Reasons^for refusal to register^tobe recorded.-

¶32

(1) Every Sub-Registrar^{refusing toregistera} document' excePt^{on the ground that the} properq/ to which it^{relatesis not situate within} his sub-district, shall^{makean order of refusal} and record his^{reasons for such order in his} BookNo. 2, and^{endorsethe words "registration} refused" on the'document;^{and, on application} made by any^{person executing or claiming under} the document,^{shall, without pal,nentand} unnecessary delay,^{give him a copy of the} reasons so recorded.

¶33

@^{No registeringofficer shall accePt for} registration a document so endorsed^{unless and} until, under the^{provisions hereinafter contained,} the document is directed^{to be registered."}

¶34

In view of the^{above submissions made by both the} Parties coupled with the provision of^{Section 7l of the RegistrationAct,} 1908, this writ petition is disposed^{of directing the Registering} Authoriry to receive and process^{the subject document(s),} presented by the petitioner,^{subiect to the} Petitioner^complying

¶35

3 t.vSK,J W.P. o.l896r of2022

¶36

with the provisions of the Indian fugistration Act, i908, and Indian Stamps Act, 1899. It is also open to the Registering Authoriry to refuse/receive the document(s) 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(s). It is made ciear that mere registration of document(s) does not confer title to the property.

¶37

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No^{order as} to

¶38

COStS.

¶39

Miscellaneous applications, if^{anypending, shall stand closed'}

SD/.M.MANJULA

ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR

,TRUE COPY// SECTION^OFFICER

¶44

To, 1 The Princioal Secretary,^{Stampsand RegistrationDepartment' Stateof} , Hf^{"tgrtt:""'fl ':il"iff :"TJ'o"L'iil;' (ResistrationandStamps)'}

¶45

a +il:"J:it"sistrar,^{Malkajsiri' Malkajgiri' Medchal-Malkaigiri} 4. The^{Telansanastate fii'"iti ;;;;:t;p its chiefEiecutiveofficer' Huz}

¶46

, B::':J'[tei]-?[ii3i?i-AtAqye:at:^to:Pi',n" .,u,.^{or re,ansana at} X ;;; A;i"^{GP FoR REVENUE'High courttor} HYderabad [OUTI

¶47

Two^{CD CoPies} B. one^{SPare CoPY} KM SB

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2610412022

ORDER ...

WP.No.18961 of 2022

4*]=<br>iEL
o
't
.* -t
{1ii
!J
t-\
l-
.s-.
,L
o\l- F\
*
HC<br>

¶54

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS.

¶55

Sri K. Raghavendra Lal v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri K. Raghavendra Lal 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

Bandi Muni Reddy Vs the State of Telangana

M/s. M.S. Happy Tomorrow Infra and 2 others Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others

Smt. Mahaboob Fatima Vs The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Syed Nusrath ali Vs the State of Telangna

G.Sri Rama Krishna Vs The State of Telangana and another

E. Ram Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others