Dismissed

Duggempudi Ravindra Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC3 Jul 2023WP/16386/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In WP No. 16386 of 2023, the petitioner challenged the registrar's action to register a sale deed. Counsel for the petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh one. The High Court allowed the withdrawal and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of the writ petition permitted with liberty to file a fresh petition; petition dismissed.

Duggempudi Ravindra Reddy Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³²⁰⁹ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY rWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 16386 0F 2023

¶4

Between:

¶5

Duggempudi Ravindra Reddy, S/o. Koti Reddy, Aged about 43 years, Occ: Business, H. No^g- 3- 174, Teachers Colony, R/o. palwancha, Bhadradri Kothagudem- 507115

¶6

...PETITIONER

¶7

AND

¶8

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its^principal Secretary, Revenue (Registration and Stamps) Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶9

2 The Diskict Registrar, Registration and Stamps, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶10

J The Sub- Registrar, Kothagudem, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶11

4 M/s LMR Constructions, Rep. by its Managing partner, Gaddam Madhusudhan Reddy s,/o Rama Krishna Reddy, Aged 60 years, occ Oontraclor, ilo 19- 1- 137, Sastry Road,^paloncha Town and Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶12

5 Gaddam Madhusudhan Reddy, S/o Rama Krishna Reddy, Aced 60 years, occ Contractor, rlo 19- 1- 137, Sastry Road,^paloncha Town and Mandai, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition under Article 226 oI lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the . affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate order, Direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3d respondent in proposing to register the document basing on the registered sale Deed bearing Doc. No. 211812023 dt. 27- 04- 2023 inspite of informing about the interim orders granted in l. A. No. 112023 in A. s. No. 17312023 through the petitioners representation dt. 01 . 05. 2023 and 02. OS. 2023, as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional, and consequently direct the respondents authorities 1o make a note in the in Dharani portal, not to register any document based on the Doc. No.211812023 dt. 27- 04- 2023.

¶15

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶16

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondent No. 2 and 3 herein to consider the representation dt. 01. OS.2023 and 02. 05. 29023, pending disposal of the main Wrlt Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. MOHITH, REPRESENTING FOR

¶17

SRI. NAWAZ HYDER ALI

¶18

Counsel forthe Respondent No. 1 to 3: GP FOR STAMPS AND REGTSTRATION Counsel for the Respondent No.4 and 5: NONE APPARED The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

¶20

I I

¶21

HON'BLE D,r. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR STJMAL/!.TrIA

¶22

WIII't PETITION No.16386 OF 2023

¶23

ORDER

¶24

I. Thrs \V^.ir Pctltion is filed seekinll 'rl-Lr, follorvirrg

¶25

sub star-. t r\ r' r lt:f

¶26

¶27

"to issrrr' ; n approprtatc Writ, Order or rlirt:r:t orr, rnore partLr uiarr'l , one in thc narure of Writ of Mzrrrdarnus declill-iltrl I tr sq1i.. of rhc 3,d respondent in pr<,1, )sltrg to rcglslcr th ,163u11c'111 basinq on the regis:er,:cl s rle cleed lrerrr rrrg ,i ,. rntcr-rt No.2 t L8 <tf 2023 clated l2'2.()4..2023 in spitc of ir.lornting about the intenm orr:1s15 g,l Lntcd in I.A.Nr;.I cl 2023^jn A.S.No. L73 of 2023 rLrro.rgh thr: peti irnIr'' reprcs('rlrat ion s clated 01.05.:Z(l:13 ancl 02.()i',.2O-l ,. as bc.ir-rg iLlcs:rl. arbitrary, urjr st ancl Lu)L- ) lstir. Ll )nal, rrnd coltsequently 1() rl r ct thr: l).J r-L sp rn ir nt to make a note in Dharan Porttl not 1() I-cgisl er ilr .' d,fcume lrt l;ased on thc Doc -rment \o.21 1il c;[ 2(,t 23 <li tccl 27 .O4.'_2023 "

¶28

Sr ,{ohith. leirrned colrnse r€.1)rci<: nting

¶29

Sri Nan az I v ler Ali, iearned counsel on r-e cord for the petltlonor, sr ei<5 p5'1-6lssion to withdraw tht: /t it l)etition u,ith a libc-t. 1.r :lir' ;r ll-csh onc

¶30

Pcrntis rion, as praved for, ts accorde-l

¶31

Dr.CSL, J 11.P.No.16386 o! 2023

¶32

)

¶33

¶34

Accordingly, the Writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn granting liberty to the petitioner to hle a fresh

¶35

one. There sha_ll be no order as to costs.

¶36

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall

¶37

stand closed.

¶38

SD/. K.SREEL A MURTHY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR !/TRUE COPY// E-a'-SECTIONOFFICER

¶39

To,

¶40

1 One CC to Sri.Nawaz Hyder^{Ali, Advocate} [OPUC] 2 Two CCs to GP for Stamps And^{Registration, High Court for the State of} Telangana. [OUT]

¶41

J Two CD Copies TJ GJ "b1.-

HIGH COURT

DATED:0310712023

ORDER

).===:
.z/ ,.,;l
i. \'- oa )
,/, t' / _1
/t ,- 'r \l
i:1
N0
l':
-!l
rj h]t
.<
'r t ..(l , ,'
\ ., -t .tr-\w_-/'

¶46

WP.No.16386 ot 2023

¶47

DISMISSING'I-I1E WRIT PETITION AS WITTHDRAWN WITHOUT CC STS.

¶48

k-..{
rN\ tl
,.\ r ">
k

Duggempudi Ravindra Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Duggempudi Ravindra Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Bhavani Nagar Welfare Association Vs State of Telangana

Sheelam Rajaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Patti Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana

Dr. P. S. Sugunakar Raju Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Izhar Ul Haque Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others

Dr. prashanth R E Vs The State of Telangana