Dismissed

Sri. Edla Naveen Kumar v. The State of Telangana and 3others

Telangana HC20 Sept 2022WP/26953/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition challenged the refusal of a Sub-Registrar to register a sale deed concerning property allotted under the Restrictive Land Act. The court disposed of the petition directing the registering authority to receive and process the document, reserving the right to refuse registration only upon recording valid reasons as per Section 71 of the Registration Act and payment of stamp duty.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Registering Authority to receive, process and register the subject document subject to compliance with the Act and Stamp Act.

Sri. Edla Naveen Kumar Vs The State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD} (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

TUESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF SEPTEIUBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{A.ABHISHEKREDDY}

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 26953^{OF 2022}

¶6

Between:

¶7

Sri. Edla Naveen Kumar, S/o.E.^{Yadaiah' Aged about 39 years,Occ} Business, Fl/o.H,No.2-3-64, Shanthi^{Nagar, HyderabadRace Club,Uppal'} Medchal-Malkajgiri District.-39.

¶8

Sri. Edla Mega Raju, S/o.E. Yadaiah,^{Agedab-out 32^years,.OccBusiness,} R/o.H.No.2-3:64, Shanthi Nagar,^{Hyder-bad RaceClub, Uppal,tvledchal-} Malkajgiri District.-39.

¶9

...PETITIONERS

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana,^{Rep.byits PrincipleSecretary Revenue} -Stamps^and Registration Department, BRK^{Bhavan,Tankbund, Hyderabad, T.S.}

¶12

The Commissioner and lG,^{Registrationand Stamps, A.P.Registration} Bhavan, M.J.Road, Abids,^Hyderabad'

¶13

The District Registrar,^{Registration and Stamps, Medchal-MalkajgiriDistrict,}

¶14

The Sub-Registrar^{office,UppalSRO, Medchal-MalkajgiriDistrict.}

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of^{the Constitutionof lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in^{the affidavit filedtherewith,the HighCourt, may be} pleased to issue writ order or orders more^{particularlyone in the nature of wRlT} oF MANDAMUS by declaring^{action of the 4th respondent i.e. sub-Registrarcum} SRO, Uppal, in refusing to^{receiveandregisterthe sale deed presented by the} petitioners in respect of H.No.2-3-64, on^{PlotNo. 108, admeasuring't 77 5 Sq'} yards or 148.39 Sq.Mtrs, each out of 355.0^{sq. Yards, with a plinth are of 200 sq.} feet ACC, in Sy.No.680, situated^{at Shanthinagr, UppalVillage andMandaland} municipality, Medchal-Malkajgiri^{District,in view of the Respondentsnotifythe}

¶17

house property rist in being risted under 22-A (1) (a) Registration Act. and the Respondents in fairing to de-notify Iand is iilegar arbitrary and against the principles of naturar justice and violation of Article 14, 21 and Articre 300-4 of constitution of rndia and contrary to the Registration Act, 190g and to consequenfly direct the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 to de-notify the said H.No.2-3_64, on Plot No.108, admeasuring 177.5 Sq. yards or 148.39 Sq.Mtrs, each out of 355.0 sq. Yards, with a printh are of 200 Sq. feet ACC, from the prohibited rist of properties and direct respondent No.4 to register the sare deeds which is presented by the petitioners pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶18

IANO:1OF2 022

¶19

Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to DlREcr the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 to de-notify the said H.No.2-3-64, on prot No.108, admeasuring 177.S Sq. yards or 14g.39 Sq. Mtrs, each out of 355.0 Sq. Yards, with a printh are of 200 sq. feet ACC, from the prohibited rist of properties and direct respondent No.4 to register the sare deed which is presented by the petitioner pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI ROYYALA THIRUPATHAIAH

¶21

Counsel for the Respondents: Gp FOR REVENUE

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

I il

¶24

THE HON'I]I,E SI(I JUSTICE A.ABHISIIEK ITEDDY

¶25

WllI'I PETITION No.26953 of 2022

¶26

ORI)ER:

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the

¶28

learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. With their consent, the present Writ Petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission.

¶29

Seeking to direct the respondent No.4 to register and release the document presented by the petitioners in respect of the subject property situated at Shanthinagar, Uppal Village and Mandal, Mec-lchal-Malkajgiri District, the petitioners have filed the present Writ Petition

¶30

Learned Government Pleader has fairly stated that the official respondents will foiiow the procedure contemplated under Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908 (fort short, 'the Act').

¶31

Section 71 of the Act reads as follows:

¶32

" lleasons for refusal to rcgister to be recorded. -

¶33

(1) Ettery Sub-Registrar refusing to register a docunznL except on tle ground that tlv property to toltich it relates is not situnted within lis srtb-tlistict slnll nnke nn order of ret'trsal nnd recorded his reasons for suclt ord.er in his Book No.2, antl endors tle ruords "registration refuxd" on tlu document;

¶34

¶35

ntul, on alrplicntion marle blJ any person ex.ecuting ot. claining ulder tlrc docunon| shall, tuithout paynznt and unnecessary drlay, giue lim a copy of the reasons so remrded. (2) No rcgistering offcer slnll accept for registmtion a document so endorsed u ess and until, under tlu proaisions lwrehafter contained, the docunent is directed to k registered.,'

¶36

In view of the submission made by the leamed Government Pleader coupled with the provisions of Section 71 of the Act, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Registering Authority to receive, process and register the subject document, subject to the petitioners complying with the provisions of the Act and Indian Stamp Act, 1899. It will be open to the Registering Authority to refuse to register the document 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 petitioners.

¶37

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶38

To,

¶39

AssrsrANrsifX'8YRffi //TRUE COPY// . U. SECTION OFFICER

¶40

1 The Principal s_e_q1e!au Revenue.Stamps and Registration Department, state of Telangana, BRK Bhavan, Tankbund,'Hyderabaii, T.S.

¶41

2 The Commissioner and lG, Registration and Stamps, A.p.Registration Bhavan, M.J.Road, Abids, Hyderabad.

¶42

3 The District Registrar, Registration and stamps, Medchal-Malkajgiri District,

¶43

¶44

¶45

The Sub-Registrar office, Uppal^{SRO, tt/edchal-MalkajgiriDishict.}

¶46

One CC to SRI ROYYALA^{THIRUPATHAIAH, Advocate} [OPUC]

¶47

Two CCs to GP for^{Revenue,High Court for the State of Telanganaat} Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶48

Two CD CoPies.

¶49

One Spare^CoPY

MP DQ

HIGH COURT

DATED:2010912022

ORDER

WP.No.26953 of 2022

/--::<br>1r{ r, STAT'4-
21 qil ?$2
,t
),/

¶58

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶59

-.s

Sri. Edla Naveen Kumar v. The State of Telangana and 3others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Edla Naveen Kumar v. The State of Telangana and 3others

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

Gunnam Venkateswar Rao and 4 Others Vs The State of Telangana and 6 Others

Sri. M. Balaiah Vs The State of Telengana and 5 Others

Mrs. Viqar Unnissa and 2 Others Vs The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Gajjela Krishna Murty Vs The State of Telangana

Auth Sign.,M/S. Sushee Hitech-Prasad-Ncc Mytas Jv, Hyderabad Vs Cheif Secy, State of Telangana, Hyderabad and 5 Others

Smt. Bagireddygari Sunitha Reddy Vs The State of Telangana