Allowed

Avuragani Saritha v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC16 Apr 2024WP/9584/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana disposed of a writ petition seeking a declaration that proceedings refusing registration of a sale deed were illegal. The court directed the registering authority to receive and register the document while reserving the right to refuse only if specific reasons are assigned under Section 71 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Registering Authority to receive, register and release the sale deed document complying with Indian Registration Act within three weeks, subject to specific reasons for refusal under Sect

Avuragani Saritha Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³²⁵⁵ I

¶2

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

¶3

TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. V. SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 9584 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

1 AVURAGANI SARITHA, Wo Late RAJESHAM Hindu aged about 57 years, Occ House wife, H. No. 21- 5- 66 Gouthaminagar, FCl, Ramagundam, Godavarikhani, District Peddapalli.

¶9

2 AVURAGANI KRANTHI KUMAR, S/o Late RAJESHAM, Hindu aged about 40 years, Occ Software Engineer, H. No. 21- 5- 66 Gouthaminagar, FCl, Ramagundam, Godavarikhani, District Peddapalli

¶10

3 AVURAGANI RAVI KIRAN, S/o Late RAJESHAM Hindu aged about 36 years, Occ Software Engineer, H. No.2'l- 5- 66 Gouthaminagar, FCl, Ramagundam, Godavarikhani, District Peddapalli.

¶11

4 AVURAGANI SUPRAJA, D/o- Late RAJESHAM Hindu aged about 30 years, Occ House Wife, H. No. 21- 5- 66 Gouthaminagar, FCl, Ramagundam, Godavarikhani, District Peddapalli

¶12

.-.PETITIONERS

¶13

AND

¶14

The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue (Registration and Stamps), Secretariat. Hyderabad. - PIN 50002't.

¶15

The Commissioner and lnspector General of Registration and Stamps, Hyderabad. 500017,

¶16

3 The District Registrar of Stamps and Assurances, Karimnagar.

¶17

4 The Sub- Registrar, GANGADHARA, Karimnagar District.

¶18

5 The District Collector, Karimnagar,

¶19

6 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Karimnagar,-

¶20

7 TheTahasildar,KOTHAPALLY,KarimnagarDistrict.

¶21

...REspoNDENTs 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 order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring proceedings of the 7th Respondent No. Bi^'l 582/2018 dated 26- 07- 20'18 and consequential action of the Respondent No. 4 in not receiving and issuing challans for registration of the sale deed document of the writ petitioners herein over their jointly succeeded Plots No 55 admeasuring 246. 66 square yards situated in Sy. No. 153 and Plot No.56 admeasuring 246. 66 Square yards situated in Sy. No. 153 at Rekurthy Village, under the guise of proceedings No.81158212018 dated 26- 07- 2018 of the Respondent No. 7, as

¶22

illegal, arbitrary and contrary to contrary to section 17 read with 22_ A and section 7'1 of lndian Registration Act and consequenuy direct the Respondents to receive and admit the sale deed document of the writ petitioners herein for registration over the Plots No 55 admeasuring 246. 6E square yards situated in Sy. No.^'1 53 and Plot No. 56 admeasuring 246.66 Square yards situated in Sy. No. 153 at Rekurthy Village and Gram Panchayat, Mandal and zilla parishad and Municipal corporation and District Karimnagar bf setting aside the proceedings of the TthRespondent No. 8t158212018 dated 26- 07- 2018 in the interest of justice

¶23

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶24

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 4thRespondent herein to receive and admit the sale deed document of the writ petitioners herein for registration over the plots No ss admeasuring 246. 66 square yards situated in sy. No. 153 and plot No.56 admeasuring 246. 66 square yards situated in Sy. No. 153 at Rekurihy Village and Gram panchayat, Mandal and Zilla Parishad and Municipal corporation and District Karimnagar as per section 71 of the lndian Registration Act, by suspending the proceedings of the 7th Respondent No. Bl15B2l2o1B dated 26- ot- 2018 pending disposal of the above main writ petition in the interest of justice

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt BABULU L

¶26

Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4: AGP FOR STAMPS AND REGISTRATION

¶27

Counsel for Respondent Nos. 5 to 7 : GP FOR REVENUE

¶28

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶29

THE HONOURABLE SRI IUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶30

WRIT PETTTIONN o.9584 of 2024

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

Heard leamed counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Govemment Pleader for Stamps and Re!-istration appearing for the respondent Nos.l to 4 and leamed Assistant Govemment pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent Nos.5 to 7. Wirh their consent,

¶33

this writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itself.

¶34

This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:

¶35

"to declnre the proceedings of the 7th Responilent No.B/1Sg2p01g dated 26.07.2018 and consequcntinl action of the Respondent No.4 in not receioing and issuing challans for iegistration of the sale deed document of the urit petitioners herein oaer their jointly succeeded Plots No.55 admeasuing 246.66 square yards sifuate-d in Sy No.L53 and Plot No.S6, admeasuing 246.66 Square yarils situated in Sy No.1S3, at Rekurthy Vilkge, under ihe guise of proceedings No.Bl1S82p01B dated 26.07.i018 of the ReJpondeit No.l, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to antrary to section 17 read with 22-A and xction 71 of Indian Registration Act and consequently direct the Responilents to r.eceiae anil admit the sale deed_document of the wit petitioners herein for registrahon ooer the Plots No.55 admeasuing 246.66 square yarilsTituated in Sy No.15i and Plot No.56 admeasuing 246.66 iquare yards situated in Sy N_o.153 at Rekurthy Village and Gram panihayat Mandnl and Zilla Parishad and Municipal Corporation anil District $rynnagar^{by settingaside the proceedings of the 7th Respondent} N o. B/15 8 U201 8 dated 26.07.20 1 8.,

¶36

Learned cou.sel for the petitioners submits that sri.A.Rajesham

¶37

i.e., the husband of petitioner No.1 and father of petitioner Nos.2 and 3

¶38

¶39

1.'

¶40

is the owner and possessor of the Plobs No.55 admeasuring 246.66 square yards situated in Sy No.153 and Plot No.56, admeasurtng246.66 Square yards situated in Sy No.153, at Rekurthy Village, having acquired the same tfuough registered sale deeds dated 20.02.2003. It is further submifted that after demise of Sri.A.Rajesham, pebitioners being the legal heirs became the owners of the subject property and thereafter, the petitioner with an intention to sell the subject property executed sale deed and duly enclosing challan uide receipt dated 25.02.2024, approached respondent authorities for registration, however respondent authorities refused to entertain the subject document for registration without asslgilnS .rny reason.

¶41

Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn attention of this Court to the order passed in W.P.No.4422i of 2018 and batdr dated 22.03.2022, the Paragraphs Nos.15, 16 and 17 are extracted hereunder

¶42

under:-

¶43

"15. This Court agrees with the contention of Mr.Siniztasa Rao Putlui, learned counsel. The said notc ilateil 28.07.20L8 was merely ksued as a letter to the Sub-Registrar, Gangadhara, instrucfing to watch in respect of Suroey Numbers appenibd thereto and restrain all registrations pertaining to those suraey numbers until they are entered into list of prohibited properties in CCA Moilule. A notification as required under Section -22A (e) was not issued. Further, thc said note dated 28.07.2018 does not specifu any reasons as to why the doanments should not be registered in terms of Section -71 of the Act, 1908 and Rule- 58 of the Rules, Therefore, the said note ilated 28.07.2018 is set aside.

¶44

¶45

L6. Considering the entire facts and also in aiew of the abooe discussion, more parficularly, the fact that the land in the subject wit petitions is not cooered by the land in the batch of writ petitions of 2003 and also consiileing the memo dated L8.11.2021 fled by Mr. G.V. Mailikarjuna Rao, learned co,unsel for respondent No.6, these wit rytitions are disposed of. As per Rule - 58 of the Rules, it is releoant to notz tlut the Registering Authoities haoe no nght Io enquire about the oalidity of a document. It is also rekoant to notc thnt mere registration of a dacument will not entitle the petitiorur to claim ight oaer the subject property as it is only conaeyance of property and it will not create any ight. The wit petitions, in uthich the Registeing Authoities haoe already entertained the documents and released the same on completion of regtstration formalifies, are disposed of in terms of .inteim orders granted by this court in the subject wit petitions. The Registeing Authorities are directed to receioe the documents produced by the petitioners and complete the registration forrnalities,^{ifthe sameare otherwise} in order. If the Registering Authoities refux to register the documents, he/she has to specifcally assign reasons in terms of Section - 71 of the Act. 1908.

¶46

With the abooe said directions, all these wit petitions are disposed of. Howeoer there shall be no order as to @stsJ,

¶47

Leamed counsel for the petitioners further submitted that it is duty

¶48

bound on the part of the respondent authorities to receive, register and release the subject document and if the respondent authorities are not registering the subject document, they shall assign reasons for refusal.

¶49

[.earned Assistant Govemment Pleader fairly stated that the respondent authorities may be directed to follow the procedure

¶50

¶51

contemplated^under section 71 of tt.e Registration Act, 190g (for short,

¶52

'the Act,1908').

¶53

Section 71, of the Act reads as follows:

¶54

Reasons for refusal to register to be recorded. _

¶55

(1-) ktery Sub-Registrar refusing to register a document, except on the ground that the property to which it relates is not situated within his sub-distict, shalt make an order of refusal and record his reasons for such order in his Book No.2, and endarse the words " registration refuseil,, on the document; and, on application made by aoy prrson executing or claiming under the doanment, shall, without payment and unnecessary delay, gnn him a copy of the reasons so recorded.

¶56

(2) No regtsteing offcer shall accept for registration a document so endorsed unless and until, uniler the prooisions hereinafter contained, the docament is directeil to be registered."

¶57

Recording the above submission made by reamed counser on either side and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case/ this writ petition is disposed of directing the Registering Authority to receive, reglster and release the subject document, subject to the petifioners complying with the provisions of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, and tndian Stamps Act,^'1899, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is also open to the Registering Authority to refuse to register the subject documen! by specifically assig.rr the reasons in

¶58

¶59

./ terms of Section 71 of the Act, 1908 and communicate the said^decision

¶60

to the petitioners.

¶61

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of.^{Miscellaneous}

¶62

applications, if any pending, shalt stand closed.^{No orderas to costs}

¶63

SD/.MOHD ISMAIL ASSISTANT REGI R

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

'1 . The Commissioner and lnspector General of Registration and^Stamps' Hvderabad. 50001^7,

¶68

z. i6e District Registrar^{of Stamps and Assurances,Karimnagar'}

¶69

a. fhe SuU-^{Regis-trar, GANGADHARA, Karimnagar District'}

¶70

One CC to Sii Babulu^{L Advocate} [OPUC] 5: iil ccs^1o cp^{For Revenue, High Court-forthe Sta]eof Telangana'[oUT]} o. r*o ccs to GP^{For Stamps And Registration,High court tor the state oI} Telangana. {OUTI

¶71

Two CD CoPies

MBC -\ v

HIGH COURT

DATED: 1Gt0412024

1HF- STA 16
s
o
o(
o Il
(.) 2 3 APR 2024
c
..\ ,
t '/
D F. sPAT .AL'' ,. i;

¶76

ORDER

¶77

WP.No.95B4 of 2024

¶78

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶79

WITHOUT COSTS

¶80

o s

Avuragani Saritha v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avuragani Saritha 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

Smt. Thahera Begum Vs The State of Telangana

Smt Davalgari Navaneetha Vs The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Chityala Kishtaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Maddi Usharani Vs The State of Telangana

Naragoni Rahul Goud Vs The State of Telangana

Mrs. Zubera Fatima Vs The State of Telangana