Disposed

The State of Telangana v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC19 Sept 2022WP/32427/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed writ and bail petitions demanding registration of sale deeds by the sub-registrar. The court disposed of them at the admission stage, directing respondent No.3 to receive, process, and register the document subject to compliance with applicable laws, while reserving the right to refuse valid objections.

What did the court decide?

Direct the 3rd Respondent to receive, process, and register the sale deed presented by the petitioner subject to compliance with the Act and Stamp Act, with a reservation to refuse if valid objections

The State of Telangana Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

MONDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 32427 OF 2022

¶6

Between:

¶7

Billa Madhusudhan Reddy S/o Late Billa Venkata Dharma Reddy, Age:Bl years, Occ: Business, Rlo.1-1-25818205, P.G. R Lake View Towers Waddepalty, Hanmakonda.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

'1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by Principal Secretary, Revenue (Stamps and Registration), Government of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶11

The Commissioner and lnspector, General of Registration and Stamps Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶12

The Sub Registrar, Warangal (R,O) Waddepally, Hanmakonda

¶13

The District Registrar, Waddepally, Hanmakonda

¶14

The Tahsildar, Hasnaparthy Mandal Hanmakonda District

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

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 a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the inaction of the Respondent No.3 in not processing, receiving and registering the sale deed presented by the petitioner in respect of the Plots No.'l and 5 to an extent of 296.88 Sq. Yds and an extent of 354.11 Sq yds respectively forming part of Sy.No.137lCl4 ol Bheeniaram village, Hasanparthy Mandal, Hanamkonda District as illegal, arbitrary and u nconstitutional, and consequently, direct the Respondent No.3 to receive and register the sale deed presented by the petitioner in respect of the said open plots in the interest of^justice.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶18

Petition under S€ )tion 151 CPC praying that in the circurnstances stated in the affidavit filed in supl ort of the petition, the High Court may b,e^plear;ed to direct the 3rd Respondent to eceive, process and register the sale rjr:ed presented by the petitioner in respec of the petitioner^jn respect of the Plc,ts No.1 and 5 to an extent of 296.88 Sq. Yo; and an extent of 354.11 Sq yds respe;jively forming part of Sy.No.'1 37lCl4 of l,heemaram village, Hasanparthy Mancal, l- anamkonda District by considering 1e representation dt.02108/2022 ol the petitioner, pending disposal of the Writ Pet ron.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitic rer:SRl. S.M.SAIFULLAH

¶20

Counsel for the Respc ldents: GP FOR REVENUE

¶21

The Court made the fc lowing: ORDER

¶22

i II

¶23

THE HON'BLE SI(I JUSTICE A.AIiFIISHEK ITEDDY WRIT PE'UTION No.32427 of 2O22 OI(DER:

¶24

I{earcl the lcarnecl counst'L for the petitiorrer ancl the learneci Governmerrt Pleacler for Revenue appcaring for the respondents. With their cor-rscnt, tlrc prt:sent {rit Petition is being disposed of at the stage of arlmission

¶25

Seeking to direct the responclent No.3 to receive, register and release the subject clocument presentecl by the petitioner in respect of the subject property situatec{ at Bheemaram Village, Hasanparthy Mandal, Hanamkoncla District, the petitionel has filed the present Writ Petition.

¶26

Learned Government Pleader has fairly stated that the official respondents n ill follow the pnrcedure contemplated under Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short,^'the Act').

¶27

Section 71 of the Act reads as follows:

¶28

I{easons for refusal to rcgister to be rccorded- -

¶29

(1) Every Sub-Registrar refusing to register a document, except on the ground that the property to rt'hich it^relates is^not sifuated within his sub-district shall make an^{order of refusal} and recorded his reasons for such order in^{his BookNo.2, and} endorse the words^{"registration} rcfused" on the^documenb and, on application rnacle by atry person cxecuting or^claiming

¶30

¶31

urld r lhc^(locunrcnt, shall, tlithout paynrent an(l u^lte:r:\sar\ (l(,la ., ljivc hirn.r copy of the reasons so recorde(|. 21 No tgistcring officer shall accegrt for registratiorr a rlo]rrnen so c rtl,,rst:d unlcss antl urrtil, urrclcr tlte provisir)lls ltlr''iraitc ton rirred, thc documcnt is dirccted to bc registcre(l.

¶32

11 /i{ 11, of the submission made Lrv tlre lcarnctl Covernnrent I'leat{er coupled with the provisiolls ol Scctrorr 71 of the r\ct, tl're Vlit I)etition is. disposed of directir-r11 t[ e Re;;istering Authoritr. tr leceive, process, register and releas(' thl subject clocurnent, ;uLr.iect to the pe'titioner complyirrit r.,ith tl-re provisiorls o the Act and Inclian Stamp Act, 189!). lt rvill be open to tl're Rt:gi: t ring Authority to refuse to register the docurnent presenteLl L 'fore him, if he has any other olrjtrtion, by duly assicning r(.tsorls in support of such decision and communicate the saicl clec sion to the petitioner

¶33

fhe r riscellaneous petitions pending, if arr,. sl.all stanrl closecl.^{-l'he -r-} shall be no order as to costs.

¶34

St)/.I.NAGALAKSHMI DEPUTY REGIqTMR rl, '\t-\l i //TRUE COPY// SE]TION OFFICER

¶35

To,

¶36

The Principa Secretary, Revenue (Stamps and Regrstration), State of Telangana,⁽ ;overnment of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyrlerabad 2. The Commir ;ioner and lnspector, General of Registrat on and Stamps Hyderabad,^-elangana. 3. The Sub Re istrar, Warangal (R,O) Waddepally, Hannakonda

¶37

The District legistrar. Waddepally, Hanmakonda 5. The Tahsild; r, Hasnaparthy Mandal Hanmakonda District 6. One CC to ;Rl S.M.SAIFULLAH Advocate tOpUCl 7. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE,High Court-for the St rte of Telangana lourl 8. Two CD Cog ies. 9. One Spare^{t ;opy.} GB DQ 6,J

HIGH COURT

DATED:19t091 2022

ORDER

WP.No.3242i of 2022

.
,/,.1Et. r rr 't"'
/o*
\A-:<br>,'7 s
u
Fr a.qJ ,i jl
Eo ci) ,i' ;l
),
.L"
: .'
<br>-;-'

¶43

DISPOSING 3F THE WP

¶44

WITHOUT C )STS.

¶45

'r-9-
z q
=-<br>

The State of Telangana v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Telangana 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

Sandrugu Swamy Vs The State of Telangana, And 2 Others

Smt.Ragi Dhanalakshmi Vs The State of Telangna

Sri. Devu Madhukar Reddy and 2 others Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others

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