Quashed

Kontham Pratap Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC10 Mar 2022WP/37727/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Hyderabad disposed of a writ petition challenging the refusal to register a sale deed. Following related batch orders, the court directed the Sub-Registrar to register documents with mandatory endorsements cautioning purchasers about potential violations of FTL laws and buffer zone restrictions pending the Supreme Court's decision on SLP (Civil) No. 19695 of 2021.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of in accordance with common order dated 18.02.2022; Sub-Registrar directed to register documents with specific warnings regarding FTL/Buffer zones pending Supreme Court outcome.

Kontham Pratap Reddy Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD} ' -' iSpeciat Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

THURSDAY,^{THE TENTHDAYOF MAR-CH} TWO THOUSAND^{ANDTWENTY TWO}

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICEB.VIJAYSEN REDDY}

¶5

WRIT P ETITION^{NO:37727 oF 2021}

¶6

Between:

¶7

KONTHAM^{PRATAP REDDY,S/o KonthamMallaReddvAoed about 53 years'} occ. Aoricutture,^{R/o. n.'r.i"."'i;tiie,''e-iuh;"nputtV'Vittige,Abdullapurmet} Mandal,-Ranga^{ReddY District'}

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State^{of Telangana,Rep by its Principal Secretarv' Revenue} ( Registration ano^stamps i'Jepi't'ti"i'^{s5Jeiariatauito ing' Hyderabad'}

¶11

The Commissioner^{and lnspector General Of RegistrationandStamps'}

¶12

Telangana State at HYderabad

¶13

The^{Sub-Registrar,Vanasthalipuram' Ranga Reddy District'}

¶14

,..RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under^{Article 226 ot the Constitution of lndia praying that in the} therewitn' the^{High court may be} circumstances^{stated in 'ii"} "irii"'ii-rlLd oleasedtoissueawrit,orderorDirection,moreparticularly'oneinthenatureof ft;f;;il;;;;;r.' nv o"tll|.ilg^{the ;ction of the,3rdrespondentin refusingto} receive,^{register anoretea-sethJ saredeed presentedby the petitioner in respect} or rand^{bearins Plot No. 5;, ;;;;;t';1s-1i9.99Xt (33:7Sq'Mtrs) in Survev} BRAHMANPALLY',^{H/o TORRUR Village'} Nos. 260/4^{and 261tlutA1} '^Sit'"t"d ',l Abdullapurmet^{Revenue it4;;;;l;-R;tsa Reddv. District' Under Turkavamjal} Municipality,^{Telansana Sd;, ;;in" 6'11 of. Memo No'G2t25712019'dated} 26_08-2020^{as iilegat,aru-]trl'ri, intawiuL-without jurisdiction and contraryto the} provisions of the^{negisffi,jn I"t,1908 and'inviolationof Article '14 of} constitution^{of lndia ,nj'1o-nr"qr"ntly direct. the 3rd respondentto receive'} register^{and releaseth" J;;;;J} piesented by the^{petitionerin respect of} above said^property, ""U]tf'tt"tai"g^{the MemoNo'G2125712019'dated} iatoatzozo,^{issuedby the 2nd respondent'}

¶16

IA NO:10F 021

¶17

PetitionUnderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstated in the affidavit^{filed in support of the peiition, irre Higrrcourt may be pleasedto} ;ir;"i il; 3rd^{respondent to receive, register andreleasethe saledeed} pl"t"nt"O by the^{petitioner in respect of land be^aringPIot No 53' admeasuring} io-osq.iJ. bir..it^{Sq.Mtrs)in Survey Nos.260/4 and 261/Lu/A1, Situatedat} annlifi,fnNpnLLY,^{H/o. fOnnUnvittage, AbdullapurmetRevenue Mandal'} nr"g. n"JOV^{Oi.iri.t,Under TurkayamjaiMunicipality, Telangana State, without} ;;;;i;; to Memo Ntg.G2t2S7t201g,^{oit"O 2610812020,pendingdisposal of the} above writ Petition.

¶18

Counsel^{for the Petitioner: SRl. G SATISHBABU} iounsel^{for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE} The Court made^{the following: ORDER}

¶19

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶20

WRIT PETITION No.37727 OF 202r

¶21

oRpER (ORAL):

¶22

Heard both sides and perused the material on record.

¶23

It is submitted by the learned counsel on either side that subject matter of this writ petition is squarely covered by the common order passed by this Court in W.P.No.328 of 2022 and batch dated 18.02.2022, as rnodifi ed by the order dated 22.02.2022 in I.A.No.2 of 2022 in W.P.No.2985 of 2022 and batch, and therefore, keeping the matter^pending will not^serve any purpose, as such, the same rnay be disposed of in tenns thereof.

¶24

This Court passed interim order in this writ petition directing the respondents to receive, process, register and release the subject document/s. However, conditions were irnposed that (a) the^petitioner/s is/are not permitted to withdraw the writ petition and (b) registration shall be subject to final result olthe writ petition.

¶25

4, In view of the above, recording the aloresaid submission of the learned counsel on either side, following the common order^dated 18.02.2022 in W.P.No.328 of 2022 and batch, as modified by the order dated 22.02.2022 in I.A.No.2 of 2022 in W.P.No.2985 of^{2022, in} terms thereof, this writ petition is disposed of as under, without any order^{as to} costs:

¶26

(A) If the subject document/s hasihave already been registered and released pursuant to e interim order;

¶27

(i) the docu envs registered by the Sub-Registrar shall be subject to outcome of SLP^(Civil) No.19695 of 2021^{filed by} the State Government before the Hon'ble Supreme Court; and

¶28

(ii) in case, it is found that there is any violation of law like plots/lands/structures being sold form part of F.T.L. and Buffer ZonelPlots having less than 30 feet road^width access, the Sub Registrar shall make an endorsement

¶29

I!t

¶30

¶31

informing/cautioning^{the ourchasers thatrisk is involved in} our'lhaseofsuchplots;llihtransactionsarehitby-relevant !i:ilil.r';;il;'i';^in"i 'ugittt"tion or the^{sameis subiect} to outcome^{of ordersoi'tne'Hon'ote Supreme Courtin SLP} iiviri"r'r"l^{goss ot zoal To that effect'an endorsement} lir,rr b" .ua"^{in the encumbrance record' website etc'}

¶32

(B) Il the^{subject docurnent/s is/are not yet registeredand released}

¶33

pursuant to^{the interim order;}

¶34

(i) the respondent^{- Sub-Registraris directed to register the} document^ot "-"f"'^{i'*tt"r" and gift etc".presented} 'for re1;istration^{nV inip"tifon"r/swltno-u-t^ reference to the} Mt:mo^{Nos G2l2'SZlZSidi't"O26 08;2020 and 29 12 2020} is:;ued by^{tne r-eiponAent-theCommlssion-erand lnspector} General ot^{Registration and Sta1l-s'Telangana;} Le,tter No.45/TPiirrilcrzorg^{dated ol-112019 issued bv the} respondent-the"Comrnis"lon"t'^{MunicipalCorporation'} Nizampet to^{th;respondent-the} .^{Sub Registrar'} - Quthbull,pu',^{n"ngl neOoy oistricL and similarletters'if} arry, issued^{uy iil"Lrioust/unicipalCommissionersin the} State;

¶35

(i ) the Sub Registrars^{in the State} -shall^makean endorsemenl^{ui'iriu i"'"t"" side of the first page.of the} document'"t"t'"JindirectionNo'(i)thalregistration-so oone is suoleJ^{iJl'ttornu of SLP (Civil) No 19695 of 2021} fifeO OV tne'Siute^{Government beforetheHon'ble Supreme} Oourt; and

¶36

(rii) in case'^{it is found thatthereis- any violationof lawlike} plots/lands/struitli"t-^{U"ing sold form^partof F T'L- and} flutfer zonElitiis -having -less than ,30 feet road width itccess, the^{SuO iegistiarshall make an endorsement} informing/cauioliing^{iti" p"chasers.thatrrsk is involved in} l)urchase^{of sucn piots; such transactions are hit by relevant} Itatutory^{pt""itil'ii;t-n't registration of the sameis subject} lo outcome^{oi oio"it'oi in""Hon'bleSupremeCourt in SLP} icivit;^{t'lo t so9! -ii zozt To thateffect' an endorsement} snatl be^{maOe on-the} -ano^{reverseside of the firsvsecondpage} atso in the^{encumbrancerecord'} of tne^ooculireni website etc'

¶37

uel thereto,^{miscellaneous petitions, if any' pending in this}

¶38

As a seq

¶39

writ petition^{;tand closed}

¶40

^.,,3P1R;f,#i'#il //TRUE^COPY' sEc{fdfi^oFFrcER

¶41

¶42

¶43

"''!::'liryifl f':1vr*:;s,ffi'ft"#'*1"il&ilil::::ffi 2. The The^{Comrnissionert}

¶44

The The^{Comrnissionert} ' i"Lng'n' State at HYderabad'

¶45

The Sub-Registrar,^{Vanasthalipuram' RangaRed.dyDistrict'} ;. o;; cC^{to s"nt. c sATlsH BABU, Advocate[oPUC]} 5. i;; ccs^{to cp ron nivemue, High court for The stateof relanganaat}

¶46

\ Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶47

Two CD Copies.

¶48

One SPare^CoPY.

AU SB \ )--

r {

HIGH COURT

DATED:10103112022

ORDER

!
i I\E STA
(
oo 21 i"'?V:l
ovz
.t
;,

¶56

WP.No.37727 of 2021

¶57

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS c5*

Kontham Pratap Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kontham Pratap 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tejesh Lohiya Vs The State of Telangana

Yunus Hussain Vs State of Telangana

Kambalapalli Sulochana Vs The State of Telangana

Mrs. Molleti Satya Naga Devi Vs The State of Telangana, And 2 Others

Sri Sankoju Ashok Vs The State of Telangana

Kolanu Anand Reddy Vs State of Telangana