Allowed

T.Narender v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC9 Jan 2024WP/523/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Writ Petition, the petitioner challenged the Sub-Registrar's refusal to register a sale deed for a residential house without providing reasons. The Court held that the Registering Authority is bound by law to perform its functions and must record reasons for refusal. A direction was issued directing the Sub-Registrar to receive and register the document if it complies with relevant laws. M

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition was disposed of by directing the Respondent No. 2 to receive and register the document if it complies with the Registration Act and Indian Stamp Act, with reasons for refusal to be c

T.Narender Vs State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

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

¶3

TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 523 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

T.Narender, S/o. Sri T.Ramulu, aged about 48 years, Occ; Private Service, Rl/o. H.No.44-347 I 5, Tirumala Nagar, Anand bagh Road, IVoula-Ali, Hyderabad.

¶9

.....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

State of Telangana, rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Sub Registrar, lt/alkajigiri, Medchal t/alkajigiri District.

¶13

The Telangana State Wakf Board, Rep by its Chief Executive Officer, 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 a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents particularly the 2nd respondent in refusing to receive, register and sale deed in respect of^part of the Residential House bearing No.44-25137, on Part of Plot No.37, under Survey No.398, admeasuring 93.5o Sq.Yards or equivalent to 78.16 Sq.Mtrs, with a built- up area of 100.00 Sft ACC Sheets, situated at TIRUMALA NAGAR, IVOULA-ALl, Under GHMC, Malkajgiri Circle and fvlandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District as illegal arbitrary against the provisions of Registration Act and against the settled principle of law and consequently direct the^2nd respondent to receive, register and release the sale deed in respect of above^property.

¶16

!.A.NO.1 0F 2024

¶17

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 to receive, process, register and release the sale deed in respect of part of the Residential House bearing No.44-25137, on Part of Plot No.37, under Survey No.39B, admeasuring 93.50 Sq.Yards or equivalent to 78.16 Sq.Mtrs, with a built-up area of 100.00 Sft ACC Sheets, situated at TIRUMALA NAGAR, MOULA-ALI, Under GHMC, Malkajgiri Circle and Mandat, Medcha l-lVlalkaj g i ri District.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI GUDI MADHUSUDHAN REDDY Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI FARHAN AZAM KHAN

¶19

The Court made the following ORDER

¶20

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶21

WRIT PETITION NO.523 OF 2024

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

Heard Mr. G.Madhusudhan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government^pleader for Stamps and Registration, who is representing respondent Nos.l and 2.

¶24

Aggrieved by the action of the second respondent-SubRegistrar, Malkajgiri, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, in refusing to receive and register the sale deed presented by the petitroner in respect of House bearing No.44-25 / 37 , under Survey No.398, admeasuring 93.50 Sq.Yards or equivalent to 78.16 Sq.Mtrs, with a built-up area of 1OO.00 Sft ACC Sheets, situated at TIRUMALA NAGAR, MOULA-ALI, under GHMC, Malkajgiri Circle and Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, the present Writ Petition is hled.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the document presented by the petitioner for registration was not entertained by the Registering Authority for the reasons best known to it. Learned counsel also states that no reasons were assigned for not entertaining the document that was presented for registration by the petitioner, which is against the provisions

¶26

¶27

of the Registration Act, 19O8 and therefore, a direction to the appropriate authority to entertain the document for registration may be issued.

¶28

Learned Assistant Government pleader for Stamps and Registration submits that necessary orders in that regard may be given.

¶29

Section 71 of the Registration Act, 19Og, reads as follows:_ "Reasons for refusal to register to be recorded.-

¶30

(1) Every Sub-Registrar refusing to register a document, except on the ground that the property to which it relates is not situate within his sub-district, shall make an order of refusal and record his reasons for such order in his Book No.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 pa5,.rnent arrd unnecessary delay, give him a copy of the reasons so recorded.

¶31

(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.,,

¶32

The Registering Authority is not empowered to refuse registration of document / s except under the circumstances mentioned under the Registration Act, 19Og and the Rules made thereunder. Also, as per the version of the petitioners, no

¶33

reasons were assigned for not entertaining the document which was presented for registration by them. Therefore, this Court is of the view that directions as prayed for have to be given to the public authority directing it to perform its function as required under law.

¶34

7 . In the said circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2-Registering Authority to receive and register the document presented by the petitioners in respect of the subject property, in case, the said document complies with the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, I 899. The Registering Authority can refuse to register the document in case, the said document is prohibited for registration under any of the provisions of law, Rules or Regulations made thereunder. However, the reasons assigned thereof and the decision taken shall be communicated to the petitioner in writing.

¶35

There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous

¶36

applications, if any, pendrn shalI stand closed.

¶37

s D /.^{M o H D:} sA+tH i.#Lili.AH //TRUE COPY/I \L,'

¶38

¶39

SECTION^OFFICER

¶40

To 1. The Principal^{Secretary, Revenue DepartmentSecretariat' Stateof Telangana} at Hvderabad.

¶41

1. ih:Hr#:[tt?,?]3lHt?:i.u:"i"jLiu,,?'lswxi.,'J'J:li'ru'*puv' 4. ?*do"Stt;,t^{cp FoR REVENUE, Hish court for the stateof relanganaat} 5tl Hvderabad. ohe One CC CC to^{to Sri Gudi Sri Farhan Azam Khan' Advocate} [OUTI^{rvr"onut'O'ni'' iieddy'Advocate (oqu9][OPUCI} 7 Two CD^CoPies

SA GJP

'-.**.

HIGH COURT

DATED:0910112024

ORDER

WP.No.523 ot 2024

1t\ E STAre.
7
t
o 2 0 JAN 202[ C)
L]

0;:s p,r,.Tc

¶50

DISPOSING OF THE W.P

¶51

WITHOUT COSTS.

¶52

T.Narender v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Narender v. 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

Navulla Malla Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Sai Charan Amberkar Vs The State of Telangana

Suchith Kondadasula, Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. T. Seetamma Vs State of Telangana

S. Sunny Edward Vs The State of Telangana

Pithani Subramanyam Vs The State of Telangana