Dismissed

Aleti Somaiah v. The District Registrar, Nalgonda District,Nalgonda

Telangana HC18 Nov 2024WP/17787/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses a writ petition challenging illegal proceedings regarding deficit stamp duty as infructuous counsel submitted that due to efflux of time, the cause did not survive for further adjudication. The court closed pending miscellaneous applications and made no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as infructuous. Miscellaneous applications if any pending, closed. Costs reserved.

Aleti Somaiah Vs The District Registrar, Nalgonda… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^325s ]

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:^'17787 OF 2011

¶7

Between:

¶8

Aleti Somaiah, S/o.Paramaiah, Hindu, aged about 55 years, Occ: Agriculture R/o.Neelakurthy Marripeda Bunglow, Warangal District

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The District Registrar, Nalgonda District,Nalgonda,

¶12

The Sub-Registrar, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition under Anicle 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 order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in issuing^proceedings No.E1121O412010 dated 15.112.2010 directing the petitioner to pay the deficit stamp duty of Rs.26,600/- along with penalty is illegal, arbitrary, and u nconstitutional consequently direct the 1st respondent to determine the deficit stamp duty to be payable by the petitioner without any penalty as per the Market Value Assistance Certificate issued by the 2nd respondent dated 28.1.2005

¶15

LA. NO:^'l OF 2011(WPMP. NO: 21396 QF 2011)

¶16

Petition under Section 1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be^pleasedto suspend the Notice in proceedings No.E1120412010 dated 15.'12.20'10 of the^{1 st} respondent directing the petitioner to pay the deficit stamp duty of Rs.26,600/-

¶17

/ alongwithpenaltyotherwisethepetitionerwouldbeputtoirreparablelossand harm

¶18

Counsel for^{the Petitioner: SRI K.V'SUBBA REDDY} Counsel for^{the Respondents:GP FOR REVENUE}

¶19

The Court made^{the following:ORDER}

¶20

¶21

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN^KUMAR

¶22

WRIT PETITION No.77787 OF 2011

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

Today when the matter has been taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the^petitioner subrnits that due to^{efflux of} time, the cause in the writ^petition does not survive for^further adjudication.

¶25

In view of the submission made by the learned counsel^for the petitioner, this writ^petition is dismissed as infructuous.

¶26

Miscellaneous applications, if any^pending, shall stand

¶27

closed. No order as to costs.

¶28

SD/. L.LAKSHMI^BABU ASSIS T REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

ECTTON^OFFICER

't. One CC to SRI K.V.SUBBA^{REDDY' Advocate [OPUCI}

¶34

Two^{CCs to GP FOR REVENUE} 'High^{Court for the State of Telangana} louTI

¶35

Two^CDCoPies

¶36

KKS

¶37

PSK f/'

HIGH COURT

DATED:1811112024

ORDER

A/ts'
./.,.
t';
u
Ii3 1J itB zffi
lln\r. .\o
\Y,A ,
* Ds:spnr

¶42

WP.No.17787 ot 2011

¶43

/ *'zr'

¶44

DlSMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS

Aleti Somaiah v. The District Registrar, Nalgonda District,Nalgonda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aleti Somaiah v. The District Registrar, Nalgonda District,Nalgonda

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

Sardar Manjeeth Singh Vs The State of Telangana

Golconda Suresh, Vs The State of Telangana

Gottimukkula Madhu Vs State of Telangana

B. Rama Raju, Vs Commissioner and Inspector General

M Rajinamma, Hyderabad Vs Prl Secy, Dept. of Revenue, Hyderabad and 4 Others

Sri. Kanmuri Shiva Nagaraju Vs Shri Venkat Reddy