Sri D.Ellaiah Alias E.Ellaiah Vs State of Telangana

'1 '' . Sri D.ELLAIAH @ E.ELLAIAH, son of Sri D.Sailoo, @ e..S1it99,irged.about,43 vears. Occ^{pvtlservice,Resident of portion of H.No 10-3-20/3/4, situatedat} Vadara Basthi, East Marredpally,^{Sec'bad-500026.}

¶10

Sri DESHETI RAJU @^{E.RAJU,son of Sri D Sarloo} @^{E.Sqil99'-qged about} - is rears. Occ . Pvt. S-ervice, Reiident of portion of H No 10-3-20/3/4, situated ruL5rRenuka Yellamma Temple,^{East Marredpally, Sec'bad-500026'}

¶11

...PETITIONERS

¶12

AND

¶13

1 STATE OF TELANGANA,^{Rep by its PrincipalSecretary' Stampsand} Registration, Revenue^{Departm6nt, Secretariat, Hyderabad}

¶14

2 DISTRICT REGISTRAR,^{Stamps and Registration Department,Nampally,} Hyderabad.

¶15

J SUB-REGISTRAR,^{Stamps and Assurance,EastMarredpally, Secunderabad}

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226^{of lhe constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in^{the affidavit filed therewith,the High court may be} pleased to issue an appropriate writ order^{or Directionmore particularly onein} the nature of writ^{of Mandamus declaringthe actionof the Respondentsin not} receiving and registering^{the SaleDeeddt.27-06-2024 along with all necessary} documents executed^{by the petitioners in favourof smt.c.LEELAWATHl, wife of} Sri C.Satyana Gyana, in^{respect of the Eastern portion ofPlotNo'82'} admeasuring in all 35^{sq.yards out of 84-66 sq.yards,coveredby premises} No.10-3-20/3/4,^{in SurveyNo.74111} ,^{situatedNearTeacher's Colony, behind} Polytechnic College,^{beside Water Tank, Easttr/arredpally, Sec'bad, T'S, as} illegal, null, void^{and arbitrarY.}

I

I

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that^{in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the writ^{petition,the High Court may be pleased} to direct the 3rd Respondent to^{receive and register the proposedSale Deed} along with all necessary documents executed by the^{petitioners in favour of} SmI.C.LEELAWATHI, wife of Sri C.Satyanarayana, in^respect of^{the Eastern} portion of Plot No.82. admeasuring in all 35 sq.yards out of 84.66 sq.yards, covered by^premises No.10-3-20/3/4, in Survey No.74h¹ ,^situatedNear Teacher's Colony, behind Polytechnic College,^beside Water^Tank,East Marredpally, Sec'bad, T.S ,^pending disposal of^{the present WritPetition.}

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI MANU

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR STAMPS & REGISTRATION

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

I

¶26

IIl

¶27

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH}

¶28

WRIT PETITION^{No.17O61 OF 2024}

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

Heard learned counsel^{lor the petitioners and} learned Assistant^{Government Pleader for Stampsand} Registration appearing^{for the respondents'With their} consent, this Writ^{Petition is disposedof at the stageof} admission itself.

¶31

It is the^{case of the petitioners that the Respondent} No.3/Sub-Registrar^{has refused to receiveand register} the Sale Deed.^{dated 27.06.2024presentedbythe} petitioners in respect^{of the Eastern portionof Plot No'82'} admeasuring in all^{35 sq.yards out of 84'66 sq'yards,} covered by^{premisesNo' 1O-3-2O/3/4, inSurvey} No.74/ 1 1, sitrrated^{Near Teacher'sColony, behind} Polytechnic College,^{beside Water Tank,East} Marredpally, Secunderabad^{and also statedthat the State} Government is claiming^{thesubject propertyas} 'Government^{land' in LGC No.167 of 1997} '^{Aggrieved by}

.>

.^SK, J wP_1706rJ\U

t

the action of the Registering Authority in not registering the subject document, the present writ petition is liled. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that in similar matters, this Court disposed of W.p.No. 11653 of 2O13 dated 23.O7.2024 and W.p.No .26345 of 2O2l d.ated. 28.08.2024 and requested to pass similar order in this writ petition.

¶36

On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration has not disputed the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶37

Recording the above said submissions made by learned counsel on either side and for the reasons alike in the orders dated 23.07.2024 and 28.08.2024, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.3/ Sub-Registrar to receive, register and release tJle Sale Deed dated 27.06.2024 presented by the petitioners in respect of subject property and also granting liberty to both the parties to seek appropriate remedy in accordance with law, subject to the outcome of the order

¶38

SK,I wP_17061_20U

¶39

/

¶40

which would be passed in W.P. No.i9i06 of 20 1O, if so otherwise aggrieved.

¶41

It is made clear that mere registration of the document does not confer title on the subject property and it is aiso made clear that this order would not have any bearing on all those matters where title/rights of the parties are pending before the authorities either 111 revision/appeals for adjudication and in any other case this order also does not preclude the parties in asserting their rights before a competent Court of law. However, there sha]l be no order as to costs.

¶42

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶43

Registry is directed to annex copies of the orders in W.P.No.11653 of 2013. dated 23.07.2024 and W.P.No.26345 of 2021, dated 28.08 .2024.

¶44

To,

¶45

SD/-l. VIJAYA L ASSISTANT REGIS RAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION O FICER '1. The Principal Secretary, . StaTp-s and Registration, Revenue Department, Secretariat. Hyderabad,'State Oiielanga";:'-''"''"

¶46

' Il!"Etti'i:t Resistrar, stamps and Registration Department, Nampauy,

¶47

The Sub-Registrar, Stamps and Assurance, East Marredpally, Secunderabad 4 One CC to SRI MANU Advocate [OpUC]

I

I //

l

/.

Two CCs to tlP FOR STAMPS & REGISTRATION, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶53

Two CD Copies

¶54

(Along with the copies of orders dated 23.07.2O24; in W.p.No.l1653 of 20lt & dated 28.08.2024 in W.P.No.26345 ot 20211

BSR

BS

f

,

t/

II

HIGH COURT

DATED:01 l05tZ02S

ORDER

WP.No.17061l of 2024

I 't A E
( 5€
/,
Sg N'\i $6 o
ffi. +
(<br><br>! DESFIl

¶66

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS / 14 ,Zl 4

¶67

T I

¶68

THE HONOURABLE SRIIUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRITPE TITIO N No.26345 of 2021,

¶69

ORDER:

¶70

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pteader for Stamps and Registration appearing for the respondents. With their consent, this writ petition is taken up for disposa[.

¶71

It is the case of the petitioners that the Registering Authority has refused to register the subject document on the ground that the 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.

¶72

This Court granted interim order on ZZ.10.ZOZ1 , directing the Registering Authority to receive and process the subject document, 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.

¶73

Today, when the matter has been taken up for hearing, tearned counsel for the petitioners submits that in pursuance to the interim

il I

2

I

order passed by this Court on 22.10.2021 , the Registering Authority have registered the subject document and further submits that in view of interim order passed by this Court no further orders are required in this Writ petition.

¶78

\

¶79

Learned Assistant Government pleader 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 201 3, dated 23.07.2074, and the relevant paragraphs reads as under:

¶80

"6. Leorned Assistant Government^pteader for Stomps and Registration would submit thot counter affidovit has been fited on beholf of respondent No.2 i.e. , District Collector, Hyderobad, ond the Poragroph No.8 reads os:

¶81

'lt is submitted thot o comprehensive land cose was f ited by the then lvlandal Revenue Officer, Morredpa y agoinst the (7) Societies and os well as some ol individuaT plot owners of Sy.No.74 of ttarredpally (paigah) vi ltage in L.G.C, No.167/97 in the Spl.Court under L.G(p) Act, l.982. The Hon'ble Spl.Court, under A.p.L.G.(p) Act dismissed the LGC No.167/97 on 18-03-2010. Aggrieved by the same, the then t RO, Morredpally tAondal filed Wp No.19106/2010, before the Hon'ble High Court ond the same is pending. The Hon'ble Spl.Court dismissed the LGC on erroneous grounds without properly apprecioting the evidence of Govt. and os such writ petition hos been- fited chollenging the same. Thus the LGC judgment has not become finaL. Further submitted that the litigotion between the porties and the Govt. has not reochei to its logicol end. lJnder such circumstances it can,t be soid thot Govt. have lost its claim. As such the interest of Govt. stiil subsists. ln view of the above the intere* ;f

1l

3

li

Govt. that subsists in the subject land witt be jeopordized if this W.P. is ollowed. Hence it is lioble for dismissal.,

¶86

Leorned Assistant Government pleader would submit that subject motter was earlier adjudicated by the Spl.Court under A.P.L.G.(P) Act, 1982, vide LGC No.t67 of 1997, however the said LGC No.167 of 1997 has been dismissed on 1g.03.2010. Aggrieved the some, the hlandol Revenue Officer, llorredpoily lvlondol, filed WP No.19106 of 20,10 bet'ore this Court and the Hon'ble Division Bench has heard ond reserved for orders.

¶87

Learned Assistont Government pleader would further submit that many parties have filed writ petitions on the similar issue and obtoined interim order and thereafter the respondent outhorities have received, registered and released the documents therein, however fairly submits thot in most of the coses, the respondent authorities have not filed counter_ affidovit ond the counter-affidovit filed in this writ petition may be adopted in all these similor pending writ petitions, os the issue involved in olt the pending writ petitions is one ond the some ond proy this Court to dispose of all the pending writ petitions, gronting liberty to all the concerned porties to seek oppropriate remedy, subject to the outcome of the order which would be poss in WP No.t9t06 of 2010.

¶88

Recording the submission made by the teorned counsel on either side ond in view of the fact thot the subject document is registered in pursuant to the interim order, this Court deems it oppropriate to disposed of the writ petition gronting liberty to both the porties to seek appropriate remedy, in accordance with law, subject to the outcome of the order which would be poss in WP No.19106 of 2010, if so othentrise aggrieved.,,

¶89

1

¶90

.1

¶91

6' Learned counsel for the petitionerss fairty submits that simitar order may be pass in this writ petition.

¶92

Recording the above submission made by learned counsel on either side and in terms of order passed by this Court in Wp No.11653 of 2013 dated 23.07.2024, this writ petition is disposed of granting tiberty to both the parties to seek appropriate remedy in accordance with [aw, subject to the outcome of the order which woutd be passed in WP No.19106 of 2010, if so otherwise aggrieved.

¶93

lt is made ctear that mere registration of the document does not confer titte on the subject property and it is atso made ctear that this order woutd not have any bearing on atI those matters where titte/rights of the parties are pending before the authorities either in revision /appeats for adjudication and in any other case this order also does not prectude the parties in asserting their rights before a competent Courr of [aw.

¶94

9- Accordingty, this writ petition is disposed of. Misceltaneous applications, if any pending, shatt stand closed. No order as to cost.

N.V.SHRAVAN KUMARJ

28.08.2024 SU

:

THE HONOURABLE SRI IUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶99

WRIT PETITION No.I1653 of 2073

¶100

ORDER

¶101

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

¶102

This writ petition is fited seeking the fottowing prayer:

¶103

"to direct directing the Respondent No.4 to register the Sole Deed doted 10.04.2006, pertaining to property in PIot bearing No.l00, odmeosuring 266 Sq yords in Survey No.74/3 in tA/S Ravi Cooperative Housing Society Limited, lvlahindra Hills, lAarredpally Secunderobod Cantonment Secunderabod executed in Petitioners fovor by one Smt Kirni Bai after decloring the refusal endorsement No.57/07 doted l9/09t2007 of the Respondent No.4 os illegal orbitrory ond unconstitutional ond releose the said document to the Petitioner. "

¶104

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one Smt.Kirni Bai was the absotute owner of Ptot No.100, admeasuring 266 Sq.yards, in Survey No.74/3, in M/s.Ravi Co-operative Housing Society Limited (Mahendra Hitts), Marredpatty, Secunderabad Cantonment, thereafter Smt.Kirni Bai executed sate deed dated 10.04.2006 in respect of subject property in favour of petitioner. Subsequentty, petitioner approach Registering Authority to register the subject property, however, the Registering Authority has refused to register the subject document. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is fil.ed.

¶105

I I

¶106

2

¶107

Today when the matter has been taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court granted interim order on 17 .04.2013, which reads hereunder:

¶108

"ln the tight of the interim direction granted by this Court in simitar matters, there shatl be a direction to respondents 3 and 4 to received and register the documents presented by the petitioner in respect of Ptot No.100 in Survey No.7413 of East Maredpatly, Secunderabad Cantonment in the event the document futfits the requirements of [aw, without reference to the ctaim of the Government that it is Government tand. The registration shatl however be subject to the resutt of this writ petition."

¶109

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuance to the interim order passed by this Court on 17.04.2013, the respondent authorities have registered 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.

¶110

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration woutd submit that counter affidavit has been fited on behatf of respondent No.2 i.e., District Cotlector, Hyderabad, and the Paragraph No.8 reads as:

¶111

"lt is submitted that a comprehensive land cose was filed by the then hlandal Revenue Officer, lAarredpally against the (7) Societies and os well os some of individual plot owners of Sy.No.74 of tAorredpolly (Paigah) village in L.G.C, No.l67/97 in the Spl.Court under L.G(P) Act, 1982. The Hon'ble Spl.Court, under A.P.L.G.(P) Act dismissed the LGC No.t67l97 on l8-03-2010. Aggrieved by the same, the then IARO, Marredpally lAandal filed

¶112

3

¶113

!

¶114

WP No.19106/2010, before the Hon'ble High Court and the same is pending. The Hon'ble Spl.Court dismissed the LGC on erroneous grounds without properly opprecioting the evidence of Govt. and as such writ petition has been filed challenging the some. Thus the LGC^judgment has not become final. Further submitted that the litigation between the porties and the Govt. has.not reached to its logical end. Under such circumstonces it can't be soid that Govt. have lost its cloim. As such the interest of Govt. sti/{ subsists. /n view of the above the interest of Govt. that subsists in the subject lond will be^jeopardized if this W.P. is allowed. Hence it is liable for^dismissal."

¶115

Learned Assistant Government Pteader woutd submit that subject matter was eartier adjudicated by the Spt.Court under A.P.L.G.(p) Act, 1982, vide LGC No.167 of 1997, however the said LGC No.167 of i997 has been dismissed on 18.03.2010. Aggrieved the same, the Mandat Revenue Officer, Marredpatty Mandat, fited WP No.'|9'106 of 2010 before this Court and the Hon'bte Division Bench has heard and reserved for orders.

¶116

B. Learned Assistant Government Pteader woutd further submit that many parties have fited writ petitions on the similar issue and obtained interim order and thereafter the respondent authorities have received, registered and released the documents therein, however fairty submits that in most of the cases, the respondent authorities have not filed counteraffidavit and the counter-affidavit fited in this writ petition may be adopted in at[ these simitar pending writ petitions, as the issue invotved in att the pending writ petitions is one and the same and pray this Court to dispose of

¶117

I I

¶118

4

¶119

att the pending writ petitions, granting tiberty to att the concerned parties to seek appropriate remedy, subject to the outcome of the order which woutd be pass in WP No.19106 of 2010.

¶120

Recording the submission made by the learned counsel on either side and in view of the fact that the subject document is registered in pursuant to the interim order, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition granting [iberty to both the parties to seek appropriate remedy, in accordance with taw, subject to the outcome of the order which woutd be pass in WP No.19106 of 2010, if so otherwise aggrieved.

¶121

lt is made ctear that mere registration of the document does not confer titte on the subject property and it is atso made clear that this order woutd not have any bearing on a[[ those matters where titte/rights of the parties are pending before the authorities either in revision/appeats for adjudication and in any other case this order also does not prectude the parties in asserting their rights before a competent Court of law.

¶122

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

¶123

N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR,I

¶124

23-07.2024 SHA

Sri D.Ellaiah Alias E.Ellaiah v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri D.Ellaiah Alias E.Ellaiah v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.Manikyamma Vs The State of Telangana

Smt.Manikyamma Vs The State of Telangana

Vadde Padma Vs The State of Telangana

Avusherla Venu Gopal Vs State of Telangana

Sri Mulajob Laxma Reddy Vs the State of Telangana

Sri.Avusherla Venu Gopal Vs The State of Telangana