Allowed

Smt. Durga Agarwal v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC20 Apr 2023WP/10472/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of this writ petition without costs, directing the District Registrar to receive, register, and release a Release Deed executed by petitioners, while clarifying that the Court gave no opinion on the merits of entitlement.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; Petitioners directed to comply with Registration Act; Registrar directed to receive, register and release the Release Deed.

Smt. Durga Agarwal Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32s6 ]

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 1 04720F 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Smt. Dur-g+gary.al, !V{o Latg Sri Vimat Chand Agarwat Aged 64 years, Occ. Housewife R/o H.No. 3-3-855/856 Qutbiguda, Sultinbazar,^-Hyderalrad

¶9

) Smt Shalmanjika Gupta, D/o Late Sri Vimat Chand Aganvai Wo Sri Saniav Gupta, -Aged 45 years Occ. Housewife, R/o Flat No.914, C-Block, 1-2-65ti, 609 to 620, Jalvayu Towers Lower Tank Bund Road. Hvderabad

¶10

J Smt Barakha.Gupta, D/-o Late Sri Vimal Chand Aganivdl Wo Sri Manoj Kumar Gqplq, Aggd 43 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o Ftat No. 303, tndia Bu[s ientrum 1-?-9qq,^{609 to 620, Elchiguda, Lower Tank BundRoad, Hyderabad}

¶11

4 Sri Ashish Agarwal, S/o Late Sri .Vimal Chand Agarwai Aged 41 years, Occ. Employee,.ryo [E! No.104, C-Btock, 1-2-608, O-Og to OZd,.latvayu-rriweri, Lower Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad.

¶12

...PETITIONERS

¶13

AND

¶14

I I!9 -Sl?!9 gfrelangana,€ep by principat Secretary Stamps and Regisrration

¶15

^{gepartment Secretariat Building, Hyderabad.}

¶16

? If^e F.spgctor^{General Stamps-and'Registration,Hyderabad,} Telangana State 3. The District Registrar Stamps and Regi-stration, Xothapet, Hideitba-d^{- --'-}

¶17

1. The District The Joint Sub-Registrar-t, Coltec"tor, nanga neEstratir# b-eplrt,hbnl'nTngb Heddt Dstri6i^{- - ''-'} deOoy Oistrict

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Anide 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Mandamus or otherwise declaring the action of the Respondent No.4 in not receiving and registering the Release Deed dated February, 2023 presented before him in respect of the premises bearing No.1-5- 259 consisting of Grourid Floor having a built up area oi 1087.16 sq. ft on rand admeasuring 399 Sq. meters situated at Kothapet village, under GHMC, Saroornagar Circle, Uppal Mandal, MedchalMalkajgiri Districl, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of the principles of natural justice and the provisions of the Registration Act and consequen y direct the

¶20

Respondent No.4 to receive and register the document executec by Petitioners 1 to 3 in favour of Petitioner No.4 in respect of premises beeLring No.1-5-259 consisting of Ground Floor havrng a built up area of 1087.1ri sq. ft on land admeasunng 399 Sq. meters situated at Kothapet v llage, under GHMC, Saroornagar Circle, Uppal Ir/andal, N,,ledchal-Malkajgiri District lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circu nstances stated ln the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court mery be pleased to direct the Registration Authorities i.e. Respondent No.4 to forthrlith receive and register the Release Deed dated ---February, 2023 executed by F)etitioners 1 to 3 in favour of Petitioner No.4

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRl. T. S. PRAVEEN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR STAMPS AND REGISTIIATION The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.i1O472 of 2023 ORDER:

¶24

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned I Assistant Government^pteaderifJl Stamps and Registration appearing for the respondents. With their consent, this writ petition .is disposed of at the stage jf admlssron.

¶25

Aggrieved by the action of respbndent No.4 in refusing to receive, register and release the document submitted by the petitioners for registration in respect of the premises bearing No.1-5-259 consisting of Ground Floor having a built up area of lO87.16 sq. feet on land admeasuring 399 sq. meters situated at 1l Kothapet Village, under GHMC,;i,S3roornagar Circle, Uppal ll ,. Mandal, Medchal - Malkjagiri District, the petitioners filed the present writ petition.

¶26

The Assistant Government Pleader has stated that the respondents will follow the procedure contemplated under Section 7 I of the Registration Act, 19O8 (for short,^.the Act, 1e08J.

¶27

Section 7 1 of the Act reads as follows:

¶28

Reasons for refusal to register to be recorded.-

¶29

(1) Every Sub-Registrar refusing to register a document, except on the ground that the property to, which it relates is not situated within his sub-district shall make an order of refusa-l and recorded his reasons for such order in his Book No.2, and endorse the words "registration refused" on the

¶30

( I

¶31

¶32

:,:^*::."",,^{arrrl. onapplicationmacle} by any person cxectrtrr.rg or ^{clirirnir.rgunder the do.r}",,t1, "riti *tnort ll^1l^-"", l casons so ret^anrl rtrrled.^{unnecessarydelay, give him} " ...p1,"rf tfr.

¶33

No reglstering officer shall accept -rii 'ir",,i].""0*for registr,rtion a the documer)l so cndorsed ""t"." provisions hcrcinafter contained, th. ao.iime.,t i" oi...ted to bc registerc( l.

¶34

In view of the altrx.e made submissions coutled with the provision under Scr:tiorr 7I of the Act, 190g, this rvrit petition is disposed ol dirccting the Registering Authority to re<reive, rcgister and release thc slrbjer:( document, subject l.o th r petitioners complying tith thc pro.,..isiorrs of the Act, i9()g as well as the Indian St:rmP Act, lg9(). Without reference to the Gazette notification, dated 26.Og.2dlg It will bc otr)en to the Registering Allthorilv to refuse the document presr nted before him, if hc has anv objection, by duly assigning reasons in support of sr.rr--h dc<:ision and communicate the said decision to the petitioncrs. It is r narlc clear that this Cour t has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case as to the tntitlement of the petitioners to gct the subject document registerccl.

¶35

Misr:ellancor-rs pelitions, if any, pendine in this writ petition shall stand t.losccl .

¶36

SD/. N. CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO REGISTRAR

¶37

NorE: That in paragraph No.4 of the order 0","0 folffi'NT W.P.No. 10472 ot 2023, the words "without reference to the Gazette Notification, dated 26.09.2013 are inserted after the words" lrldian Stamps Act, 1989", and before the words "lt will be open " as por the orders of the Hon'ble court dated 141812023 in l.A.No.2 0l 2023 This amended Order shall substitute the earlier order vyhich has already been dispatched on 18/05/2023

¶38

¶39

SDA N. CHANDR,q SEKHAF RAO ASSISTANT REGFTRAR ,TRUE COPY//

¶40

sE(;TtoN oFF|CERoFF|CER

¶41

sE(;TtoN oFF|CERoFF|CER To, 1. The .Principal secretary stamps .rnd Registration Department secretariat Building, T.S.,Hyderabad.

¶42

The lnsoector General^{Stamps and Registration, Hyderabad' TelanganaState}

¶43

2.) +il: iiiiHJ;i";iCioista-moi and^{Reqistration, Ko[hapet'} [vdg1auit.a

¶44

4 +i]; ;;i;i'il:XJsiili|.rir'^{ii" gi.iiatioiDepartment RansaReddv Di strict} 5 The District Collector,^{Ranga Reddy Dlstnct} 6 +;".,^"ie:'i;'i;p Fijii^{SiAi,rpi nirb-n-ect'srnerloN ,Hish court ror the state or} Telanqana,at^HYderabad [OUTI

¶45

7 oiiE'ic'i"' snil r s^{pnAveefuKUMAR, Advocate[oPUC]} 8 Two CD Copies BM GJP

a./

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2010412023

1410812023

AMENDED ORDER

WP.No.10472 of 2023

-/r=
:ir "t STAr F
(
,|/<br>'?
't,
coJ 77 luB 2m z
9.. .tr'i'
[,: - -,." .r (

¶53

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶54

;)
\ \rY .'<br>--*.. aQ-'"'
/1)'/- 6t'

Smt. Durga Agarwal v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Durga Agarwal 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

Syed Misba Ahmed Vs The Principal Secretary (Revenue)

K.Lal Kishore Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary

Kuchipudi Kusuma Vs The State of Telangana

Smt.T.Padmavathi Vs The State of Telangana

Mohd. Mohiuddin Mustafa Vs The State of Telangana

Naveen Soma Sunder Rao Vs the State of Telangana