Dismissed

Srinath Dhanwantary, v. Government of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC21 Nov 2024WP/8013/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana disposed of a writ petition filed by an individual seeking registration of a gift deed. The Court held that since the document was already registered following an interim order, and pending litigation on land acquisition claims was sub judice, the petition is dismissed with liberty to approach the court on the final outcome of related proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of granting liberty to parties to seek appropriate remedy subject to the outcome of WP No.19106 of 2010.

Srinath Dhanwantary, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

:-*--.

¶2

[³²⁵⁵ ]

¶3

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

¶4

THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN^KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 8013 OF 2013

¶8

Between:

¶9

Srinath Dhanwantary, S/o Sri D.Ramakanth,^{Aged about 41 years-Occ P.rivaIe} employee, R/O H'.No. 10-3-31/6/8, Street No.7,^{EastMarredpally,} Secunderabad

¶10

...PETraoNER

¶11

AND

¶12

Gsvernment of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by^{its Secretary Revenue Department,} A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶13

The District Collectbr, Hyderabad District^{Nampalli Station Road,Hyderabad} 3. The District Registrar,^{D-epartmentof Stampsand Registration,Hyderabad.} 4. The Joint Sub-Registrar-lil, Bowenpally,^Hyderabad.

¶14

(R-4 Cause Title is amended as^per Court Order dated^{03.06.2013 in} wPMP No'1525112o131'

¶15

...RES'.NDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution^{of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the^{affidavit filedtherewith, the High Courtmay be} pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more in the^{nature of Writ of} Mandamus directing the respondents^{more particularly the 4th respondent to} register and release the Gift deed dated^{22-2-2013, executed in respectof PIot} No.174, in Sy.No. 74t'12 ot^part of^{G.L.R'Sy.No.396, forming part of Three} Moorthy Weaker Section co-op^{Housing SocietyLtd, East Marredpally,Mahendra} Hills, Secunderabad, by declaring the^{refusalendorsement No5113} dt-25-2-2o13, as wholly illegal,^{arbitrary, untenable unsustainable and} u nconstitutional.

¶17

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP. NO: 10049 0F 2013)

¶18

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 4th respondent to receive, register and release the Gift deed dt:22-22013 executed in favour of the petitioner in respect of prot No.174, in sy.No. 74112 or part of G.L.R.sy.No. 396, forming part of rhree Moorthy weaker section co-op Housing society Ltd, East Marredpaily, Mahendra Hiils, secunderabad pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt. GANTA RAMAKRISHNA

¶20

counsel for the Respondents: AGp FoR srAMps AND REGlsrRATroN The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

:-^{'' !.:-rs} -

¶22

¶23

THE HONOURABLE SRIIUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.8013 of 2013

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and [earned Assistant Government Pteader for Stamps and Registration appearing for the respondents. With their consent, this writ petition is disposed of.

¶26

lt is the case of the petitioner that the Registering Authority has refused to register the subject document on the ground thaLthe state Government is ctaiming the subject property as.Government [and' in LGC No.167 of 1997. Aggrieved by the action of the Registering Authority in not registering the subject document, the present writ petition is fited.

¶27

This Court granted interim order on 19.03.2013, directing the Registering Authority to receive and process the subject documents, subject to the outcome of Wp No..19106 of 2010 fited by the State Government against the order passed by Speciat Court under A.p.Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 in LGC No.167 of 1997.

¶28

Today, when the matter has been taken up for hearing, tearned counset for the petitioner submits that in pursuance to the interim order passed by this Court on 19.03.201 3, the Registering Authority

¶29

¶30

¶31

have registerr:d the subject property and further submits that in view of interim order passed by this Court no further orders are required to be passed in this Writ petition.

¶32

Learnecl Assistant Government pieader for Stamps and Registration woutd submit that the subject matter in this writ petition is squarety covered by the order passed by this Court in Wp No.11653 of 2013, dated 23.07.2024, and the retevant paragraphs Nos.6 to 9 reads as under:

¶33

"6. Learned Assistant Government pleader t'or Stamps and Registrotion would submit that counter offidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No.2 i.e., District Collector, Hyderabad, ond the Porogroph No.B reads os:

¶34

'lt is submitted that a comprehensive lond case was filed by the then Mondal Revenue Officer, ty'torredpolly agoinst the (7) Societies ond as well as some of individuoT plot owners of Sy.No.74 of lAorredpolty (poigah) villoge in L.ri.C, No.167/97 in the Spl.Court under L.G(p) Act,1gBZ. The Hon'ble Spl.Court, under A.p.L.G.(p) Act dismissed the LGC No.167/97 on t8-03-2010. Aggrieved by the same, the then ttlR7, Marredpalty Mondol filed Wp No.19106/2010, before the Hon,bte High Court ond the some is pending. The Hon,ble Spl.Court dismissed the LGC on erroneous grounds without properly opprecioting the evidence of Govt. and as such writ petililon has been'fited chollenging the some. Thus the LGC judgment hai not become finol. Further submitted tiot the litigotion between the parties ond the Govt. has not reoched to its logicol end. Llnder such circumstonces it con,t be said that Govt. hove lost its cloim. As such the interest of Govt. stiil subsists. ln view of the above the interest of Govt. thot subsrsts in the subject lond wi be jeopordized if this W.P. is ollowed. Hence it is liable for dismissal.'

¶35

¶36

Leorned Assistont Government^{Pleaderwouldsubmitthat} subject matter was eorlier adjudicoted^{by the Spl.Courtunder} A.P.L.G.(P) Act, 1982, vide LGC^{No.167 of 1997, howeverthe} soid LGC No.167 of 1997 has been^{dismissed on 18.03.2010.} Aggrieved the same, the Mondol^{Revenue Officer,Morredpolly} Mondal, filed WP No.19106 of 2010^{before this Court and the} Hon'ble Division Bench^{has heordand reserved} for^orders-

¶37

Learned Assistont Government^{Pleader would} further submit thot mony^partieshove filed^{writ petitionson the similor} issue ond obtoined interim order^{and thereofterthe respondent} outhorities hove received,^{registered ond releosedthe} documents therein, however foirly^{submitsthat in most of the} cases, t:he respondent^{authorities hove not} filed^cbunter' affidavit and the counter-of fidavit filed^{in this writ petition} may be odopted in oll these^{similorpendingwrit petitions'os} the issue involved in all^{the pendingwrit petitionsis one and} the same ond^proy this^{Courtto disposeof all the pendingwrit} petitions, gronting liberty to oll the concerned^{porties to seek} oppropriote remedy, subject^{to the outcome of the order which} would be^pass in WP No.19106^{of 2010.}

¶38

g. Recording the submission^{modeby the learned counselon} either side ond in^view of^the foct^{thot the subiect document is} registered in^{pursuant to the interim order,this Courtdeems it} oppropriote to disposed of the^{writ petition grantinglibertyto} both the parties to^seek oppropriate^{remedy, in accordancewith} low, subject to the outcome^{of the order which would be poss in} WP No.19106 of 2010, if^{so otherwise aggrieved."}

¶39

,I I

¶40

LearneC counset for the petitioner fairty submits that simitar order may be pass in this writ petition.

¶41

Recording the above submission made by tearned counse[ on either side and the reasons atike in Wp No.11653 of 201 3, dated 23.07.2024, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition in terms of order passed in wp No..l 1653 0f 2013, dated 23.07.2024, granting tiberty to both the parties to seek appropriate remedy, in accordance with taw, subject to the outcome of the order which woutd be passed in Wp No..l91O6 of 2010, if so otherwise aggrieved.

¶42

8' lt is made ctear that mere registration of the document does not confer titre on the subject property and it is atso made ctear that this order would not have any bearing on at[ those matters where titte/rights of the parties are pending before the authorities either in revision / appea ts for adjudication and in any other case this order atso does not prectude the parties in asserting their rights before a competent Court of [aw.

¶43

Accordingty, this writ pet.ition is disposed of. MisceItaneous applications, if any pending, shatt stand ctosed. No order as to cost.

To,

1 2 3 4 6. 7 BM i;;

'fli$S#N,'$i6,BfRRI /

¶48

//TRUE COPYII SECTION OFFICER

::::*''

HIGH COURT

DATED:21 11112024

-f --'..-a:l
--<br>::;/
,/
']'
r 1'. '.'' :
tf'
!i')T 0 7 ,,;1, 2.ilt5 i'
i
..3
I ,.o,{:t',,,,r",,.r, *
;-t__;ir, ,a

¶53

ORDER

¶54

WP.No.8013 of 2013

¶55

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ?+

¶56

26 lrI Lo CoPLal-

Srinath Dhanwantary, v. Government of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Srinath Dhanwantary, v. Government of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Turgaga Balakrishna Murthy Vs The State of Telangana

Sri B. Sunil Kumar, Secunderabad., Vs Secretary, Revenue Department, Secunderabad and 2 Others

Mudike Srinivasulu, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

R.Satyanarayana,Hyd,and 2 Vs Govt.of Ap,Prl.Scy,Rev,Hyd,and 4

D. Vijaya Laxmi, Secbad Vs Secy Revenue Dept, Hyd and 3 Ot

Smt. R.Lalithamma Vs The State of Telangana.