Disposed

Shaik Fayaz Ahmed v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC3 Oct 2023WP/27267/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the Sub-Registrar's refusal to receive a sale deed for a property in a prohibitory zone under the Telangana State Wakf Rules. The Court held that the Registrar cannot refuse to receive documents and directed him to register the document if the property is not in the prohibitory list and formalities are met.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No.2 to receive, register, and release the Sale Deed if the property is not in the prohibitory list, else to issue a rejection order narrating grounds.

Shaik Fayaz Ahmed Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^320e ]

¶2

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

¶3

TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYTHREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:27267 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Shaik Fayaz A.hmed, S/o. Shaik Abdul Muzeeb, Aged about 32 years, Occ ; gmployee, Rl/o.H.No.43-422, RTC Colony, Krishna Nagar, Near Ad-ams School, Moulali, Secunderabad, Hyderabad.

¶9

.....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 . The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary (Stamps and Registration), Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Sub-Registrar, Malkajgiri, Medchal Malkajgiri District.

¶13

The Telangana Wakf Board, Rep. by its Chief Executive Officer, Huz House, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶14

.....RESPONDENTS

¶15

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 Writ or direction preferably Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No.2, in not receiving, registering and releasing the sale deed presented by the petitioner in respect of House No.43-422 (Old No.431 53/5), in Survey No.41^'t , admeasuring 156 Sq. yards or 130.40 Sq. meters, with a builtuparea of 400 Sq.ft, situated at Hanuman Nagar, Near Dr. Krishna Nagar, Moula ali, under GHMC of Malkajgiri Circle and Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District erstwhile Rangareddy District, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to provisions of law and violation of Article 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia, and consequently direct the Respondent No.2 to receive, process, register and release the sale deed / any other deeds presented in respect of House No.43422 (Old No.43-153/5), in Survey No.41'l , admeasuring 156 Sq. yards ol130.40

¶16

Sq. meters, with a b riltuparea of 400 Sq.ft, situated at Hanurnz n Nlagar, Near Dr. Krishna Nagar, Mou a ali, under GHMC of Malkajgiri C rcle anc Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District, 'vithout insisting No-objection Certificate (NOC) from the Respondent No.3.

¶17

!.A.NO:1 OF 2023

¶18

Petition Undel Section^'151 CPC praying that in the c rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Courl nray be^pleased to direct the Responde nt No.2 forthwith to receive,^process, regrister and release the sale deed / any other deeds in respect of Hous: No..13-422^(Old No.43'1 53/5), in Survey No 41 1, admeasuring 156 Sq. yards c,r 130 4() Sq. meters, with a builtuparea of 400 Sq.ft, situated at Hanuman Nagar Near^C r. llrishna Nagar, Moula ali, under G1{MC of Malkajgiri Circle and Mandal, Medr:hal Malkajgiri District, presented t y the^petitioner, without insisting No-c bject on Certificate (NOC) from the Respondent No.3, pending disposal of lhe writ letition in the interest of^justice.

¶19

Counsel for the Petit oner : SRI V.SUBBA RAO

¶20

Counsel forthe Respo rdent Nos.1 & 2 : SRI B.DILEEP KUMAR. A(iP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI ABU AKRAM, SC FOli^'fELANGANA STATE WAKF BOAR )

¶21

The Court made the lollowing ORDER

¶22

HON'BLE DT. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA WRIT PETITION No.27267 of 2023

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

l. Heard Sri V.Subba Rao, learned counsel for the Writ Petitioner, Sri B.Dileep Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration, who is representing Respondent Nos. I and 2 and Sri Laraib Abu Touf, learned counsel who is representing Sri Abu Akram, learned Standing Counsel for the Telangana State Wakf Board, who is representing Respondent No.3.

¶25

This Writ Petition is fiIed seeking the Court an order in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of Respondent No.2-Sub-Registrar, Malkajgiri, MedchalMafkajgiri District, in receiving, registering and releasing the Sale Deed presented by the petitioner in respect of H.No.4342.2, admeasuring 156 Sq.yards, located in S-v.No.4l I of Hanuman Nagar, Near Krishna Nagar, Moulali, under GI{MC Malkajgiri Circle and MandaJ, Medchal-Malkajgiri District. as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to direct Respondent No.2 to receive, register ancl release the Sale Deed presented by the petitioner in respect of the subject propert)'.

¶26

¶27

Dr CSL.^J 'I'.1'No.17267 of2023

¶28

l,earned counsel for the petitioner contends that^though the petitioner has complied with all the required forrnalities and though the subject property is not pro)ribited for registration, frr the reasons best known, Respondenl. No.2 is not entertain ing the said document for registrat:.on and therefore, necgssary orders may be passed.

¶29

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Siiarnps and Registration states that in case, the subject propel'ty is not in the prohibitory list, Respondent No.2 would certainllr receive and register t1e document.

¶30

l,earned Standing Counsel for the Telangar,a State Wakf Board submil s that the property in question apf)ears to be in prohibitory lirrt falling within the ambit of Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 and therefore, necessary directions may be issu< d to the Sub-Registrar concerned to veri$r and proceed with.

¶31

6, Section 71 of the Registration Act, 19()8, reads as follows:-

¶32

"Reason; lbr refusal to register to be recorded.--

¶33

(1) Every Sub-Registrar refusing to register a Cc,cu:rent, excef^,t on the grou nd that the propr-'rty t r wh ich it

¶34

¶35

DT CSL, J w.P.No.27267 of202l

¶36

relates is not situate within his sub-district, shall make an order of refusal and record his reasons for such order in his Book l{o. 2, and endorse the words 'registration refused" on the document; and, on application made by any person executing or claiming under the document, shall, without payment and unnecessary delay, give him a copy of the reasons so recorded.

¶37

(2) No registering officer shall accept for registration a document so endorsed unless and until, under the provisions hereinafter contained, the document is directed to be registered."

¶38

7 . The Sub-Registrar has no power to refuse to receive the document for registration. ln case any document is presented for registration and where the Sub-Registrar finds any grounds due to which he cannot proceed with registration, he can refuse to register the document indicating the grounds for refusal. Therefore, this Court is of the view that this Writ Petition can be disposed of giving directions to that effect.

¶39

Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following direction:-

¶40

Respondent No.2- Sub-Registrar, Malkajgii, MedchalMalkajgiri District, is directed to receiue the Sale Deed that u.tould be presented bg the petitioner in respect qf

¶41

¶42

Dr CSL. J W P.],io.27267 of2023

¶43

H.No.43-4:,)2, admeasuring 156 Sq.gards, located in Sg.No.411 o.f Hanuman Nagar, Near Knshna ltrager, Moulali, uitd.er GHMC Malkajgiri Circle ,tnd )v[onaal, Medchal-lv. alkajgii Distict, register and rele'zs e rLe document ln case, the subject propertg i:; not pres,znt in the proitibitory list and the doanment presented is in consont'-nce with the prouisions of the Registrati.on Act, 19OB and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. Hn.uet'er, in case the document is found not liable for registratioit, necessary orders maA be pas:;ed narrating lhe grounds for rejection and comnLuniczte the same o the petitioner. There shall b<t no ctnler as to cosrs

¶44

Miscellar eous petitions pending, if any, strall stand

¶45

closed

¶46

//rRuE coPY/' ^:.'"'i'1J,l!l"J[t'sr',.'# ,EC].|ON^&r,"r*

¶47

to ,. ,n. Principal l;ecretary' (Stamps and Registration''' Secret;rriai' State^of " telanoana at l{Yderabad ' ,. fi5iffi-R;i'ti"i^{N'r"ui['ignly,";"r"ii:U,*?'35!l)j]'fii1,} Frou,;e, Namparrv,

¶48

The Chief^Executive , +H"8tSL^{GP ror Revenue' Hish courtfor the Slateof rolanganaat} Hvderabad. [()UTl 4 .^ ijL: #il^{d; v dubba Rao' Advocate IoPUcl .} t) one CC^{to sr Abu n*t"l"sdEoi"iti'ig'St"le Waf l tloard (oPUC)} 7. Two^{CD CoPi:s} SA GJP &"

HIGH COURT

DATED:03110t2023

ORDER

(
1
I

WP.No.27267 of 2023

DISPOSING OI: THE W.P WITHOUT COS T'S.

¶55

6-)
N<br>tn.)
r3l 1D

Shaik Fayaz Ahmed v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaik Fayaz Ahmed 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

Badugunnala Chandrakala Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Chitteti Venkata Subbamma Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Buchamolla Narsavva Vs Smt. Agyala Varalaxmi

Damuluri Shanthi Vs The State of Telangana

DamuluriNarahari Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Nooruddin Vs The State of Telangana