Dismissed

M/s. Pratheek Construction and Developers v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC14 Mar 2022WP/32852/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition for registration of a sale deed by applying a common order in related cases (W.P. No. 328 of 2022). The petition was disposed of in terms of a previous common order, with directions to the Sub-Registrar to register the document regardless of specific objection letters, subject to future Supreme Court outcomes, and to make a cautionary endorsement regard

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of as under: Sub-Registrar directed to register the document without reference to objection letters, subject to the outcome of SLP (Civil) No. 19695 of 2021, and to make a cauti

M/s. Pratheek Construction and Developers Vs The State… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

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

¶2

MONDAY ,THE FOURTEENTH^{DAY OF IVIARCH} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI^{JUSTICE B.VIJAYSENREDDY}

¶5

WRIT PETITIO^{N NO: 32852 OF 2021}

¶6

Between:

¶7

tr//s. Pratheek construction^{and Developers,Rep. by its lvlanaging_Partner,} B. Ramachandra, S/o. B'^{Padmaiah,aged about 33 years'. (Jcc Buslness'} nyo.'iiai tlo. io2,^{ptot nos. B tis 9, Manasa P1i{e' opp' NRI Jr' College,} BaChupally Village and^{Mandal,Medchal Ir/alkaigiri District}

¶8

...pETtTlONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana,^{represented by its PrincipalSecretary' Stamps and} Reoistration Depar{ment, Secretariat,^Hyderabad

¶11

z fnE 5uO-negistiar, Quthbullapur^{tvlanddl,.RangaReddy District} 5. fhe Commis-sionei and^{lnspector Generalof Registrationand Stamps,} Telangana. State

¶12

+. iftiivi.ampliMunicipal^{corporation,rep. by its commissioner,tr/edchal} Malkajgiri District ...RES'.NDENTS

¶13

Petition under Article^{226 of the constitutionof lndiaprayingthat in the} circumstances stated in^{the affidavitfiled therewith,the High court may be} pleased to issue a writ or order^{or direction more particularlyonein the natureof} writ of Mandamus declaring^{the actionof the 2nd respondent in refusing to} receive, register and^{releasethe saledeed presented by the petitioner in respect} of semi finished flat^{no. 401 in 4th flooron Plot No. 121 , in surveyNos.29 and} 30 situated at Bachupally^{Village and GramPanchayat' BachupallyMandal'} Medchal-Malkajgiri^{District,Telangana State on the grounds of (i) Llemobearing} no.G2125712019 dated^{26.08.2020 issued by the 3rd respondentand (ii) letter} bearingno.45/TP/NMC/20lgdatedol.ll.2olsissuedbythe4threspondentas illegal, arbitrary and contrary^{to the provisions of the Registration Act, '1908 and} also contrary to the orders^{passed by this Honble court in w.P.No.9248 of 2021} and consequently direct^{the 2nd respondent to receive, register and release the} sale deed^{presented by the petitionerin respectof semi finished flat no. 401 in} 4th floor on Plot No. 121, in^{Survey Nos. 29 and 30 situatedat Bachupally Village} and Gram Panchayat,^{BachupallyMandal, tr4edchal-lVlalkaigiriDistrict, Telangana}

¶14

State without reference to (i) Memo bearing^{no.G2125712019dated26.08.2020} issued by the 3rd respondent and⁽ⁱⁱ⁾ the^{letter bearingno.45/TP/NMC/2019} issued by the 4th respondent dated^{01 .11.2019as directed in W.P.No.9248 of} 2021 .

¶15

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶16

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying thatⁱⁿ the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in support^{of the petition,the High Court may be pleasedTo} direct the 2nd respondent to^{receive, registerand releasethe sale deed} presented by the petitioner in respect of semi finished flat no. 401 in 4th floor on Plot No. 121 , in Survey Nos. 29 and^{30 situated at BachupallyVillage and Gram} Panchayat, Bachupally Mandal, tr/edchal-lValkajgiri^{District, Telangana State} without reference to⁽ⁱ⁾ Memo bearing^{no.G2125712019dated 26.08.2020issued} by the 3rd respondent and⁽ⁱⁱ⁾ the letter bearing^{no.45/TP/NMC/2019issued by} the 4th respondent dated⁰¹ .11.2019 as directed in^W.P.No.924B oI^2021, pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI S. SRIDHAR Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 to^{3: GP FOR REVENUE} Counsel forthe Respondent No.4: SRI^{N. PRAVEEN KUMAR,} SC FOR MUNICIPALIW

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

I I

t I

HONOI.JRABLE SI{I.ITISTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶23

WRIT PE1'I1' ION No.328s2 0I,- 2021

¶24

oRpER (ORAL) :

¶25

Heard both sides and perused the rnaterial on record.

¶26

It is subrnitted by the learned counsel on either side that subject matter of this writ petition is squarcly covered by the common order passed by this court in w.P.No.328 of 2022 and batch dated rg.02.2022, as modified by the order dated22.02.2022 in I.A.No.2 of 2022 in w.p.No.29g5 of 2022 and batch, and therefore, keeping the matter pending will not serve any purpose, as such, the same rnay be disposecl of in terms thereof.

¶27

This court passed interim orcler in this writ petition directing the respondents to receive, process, register antr rerease the subject document/s. However, conditions were i.rposecl that (a) the petitioner/s is/are not permitted to withdraw the writ petition and (b) registration shall be subject to final resuh olthe writ pctiliorr.

¶28

In view ol the above. recording the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel on either sicle, firllos,ing the common order dated 18.02.2022 in w.P. No.328 of 2022 and barch, as modified by the order dated 22.02.2022 in r.A- No.2 of 2022 h w.p.No.2985 of 2022, in terms thereof, this writ petition is disposecl or as untrer, without any order as to costs:

¶29

(A) If the subject docunre,l/s has/have arready been registered and released pursuant to the interinl order;

¶30

(i) thc docunrent/s rcqisrcred bv the Sub-Registrar shall be subject to outconte r.l1'S[.P ((iir.il) No.l969_s ol ]021 filed by the State Govemment bcfbrc thc I krn'ble Suprcnrc C.orrn; .ur(i

¶31

(ii) in case, it is lound rhat rhcrc is any violation of law like plots/lands/structures bcing sold lirnn parl of F.T.L. and Buffer ZonelPlots having less than j() lLct road width access, the Sub

¶32

¶33

Registr-ar shall^{nrakc an endorsementinfonning/cautioning tirc} pur".lr"r"., that risk^{is involved in purchaseof such plots;such} transactiotis^{are hit by relevant statutoryprovisions;that registration} of thc sanle is^{subjectto outcomeof orders of the Hon'bleSupreme} Court in SLI'^{(Civil) No.i9695 ol2021.To that effeot, an} entlolscrncnt shall^{be madein the encumbrance record, website ctc'}

¶34

(B)Ifthesub.jectclocumenVsis/arenotyetregisteredandreleased

¶35

pursuant to the intcrim order;

¶36

(i) Ihc respondent - Sub-Registrar is^{directedto registerthe} tlocurncnt of salc.^{transfer and gift etc., presentedfor registrationby} the pctitioner/s without reference^{to the Memo Nos'G2i25712019} drrtctl 26.08.2020 and^{29.12.2020 issuedby the respondent-the} Cotnrtrissioncr and lnspector^{General of Registration andStarnps'} 'l'clangana; Lctter No.45/TPiNMC/2019 dated 01'l l'2019 issued b-'- thc rcspondent-the^{Commissioner,Municipal Corporation'} Nizampct to the^{respondent-theSubRegistrar,} Quthbullapur'^Ranga Redtll" District. and similar^{letters, if any,issued by the various} lv{unicipal Cornmissioners^{in the State;}

¶37

(ii) thc Sub Rcgistrars in the^{Stateshall makean endorsement at the} rcr'crscsideof.thcfirstpageofthedocumentrcferredindircctiorr No.(i) tliat registration^{so done is subjectto outcomeof SLP (Civil)} No. I 9695 o12021 filcd^{by the State Govemmentbelore the Hon'trle} Supre tlrc Cottfi; and

¶38

(iii) in case. it is lound that^{there is any violationof law like plots/} latt(ls^I structures being^{soldform part of F'T'L' ancl BufferZorlc/} I)lots having lcss than 30^{feet road widthaccess,the Sub Registrar} sltall rttake an^{enclorsement informing/ cautioning thopurchasers} tlrat lisk is involved^{irr purchaseof such plots;such transactions arc} Itit bv rclcvaut statutort^{provisions;that registrationof thesam-c- is} subicct to outcome of^{orders of the Hon'bleSupremcCourt in S[-l'} (('ivil) No.19695 of202l. To that effect,^{an endorscmetrtshall bc} Irtarlc ott thc reversc^{side of the first / secondpage of the docutrcnt} arl(i lls() in the cncuurbrance^{record, websiteetc'}

¶39

As a setltrcl thereto.^{nliscellaneouspetitions, lf any, pcndingin this}

¶40

wnt petition stantl^{c losecl}

¶41

SD/.L.SHIVA PARVATHI ASSISTANT^R ISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECT N OFFICER

¶42

¶43

I To, 1 The Principal^{Secretary,.Stampsand RegistrationDepartment'Stateof} 2 ksttrar::ll3lib1i,lil,i3ffi^{andar, Ransa Reddv District}

¶44

I
I

¶45

¶46

The Commissioner and lnspector General of Registration and Stamps, Telangana State

¶47

The.Commissioner, Nizampet Municipal Corporation, Medchal tt/alkajgiri District

¶48

One CC to Sri S. Sridhar, Advocate [OPUC]

¶49

Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶50

One CC to Sri N. Praveen Kumar, SC for Municipality [OPUC]

¶51

B. Two CD Copies

¶52

One Spare Copy.

sln

MMA

HIGH COURT

DATED:141O312022

I
I

ORDER

1H E ST/J ra
/3
2 0 AUE 2022
o
D€

¶60

WP.No.32852 ot 2021

¶61

DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

¶62

?-o>>-
I

M/s. Pratheek Construction and Developers v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Pratheek Construction and Developers 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shambhavi Developers Vs The State of Telangana

T.Veera Bhaskar - Anr. Vs Smt Suguna

P. Sanjeeva Reddy Vs the State of Telangana

Smt. Hafeezunnisa Begum Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

Shaik Afzal Vs The State of Telangana

Matam Mallesh Vs The State of Telangana, And 3 Others