Disposed

Sri. G. Ravi Mohan v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Jul 2025WP/20843/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged refusal by the Sub-Registrar to register their sale deed, the property being claimed as Government land in a pending land grabbing case. The connected writ against the LGC order having been dismissed, the court directed registration subject to compliance with the Registration and Stamps Acts.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Sub-Registrar, Bowenpally to receive, register and release the sale deed dated 28.05.2025 without reference to LGC No.167 of 1997, subject to statutory compliance.

Sri. G. Ravi Mohan Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³³⁰²¹

¶2

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

¶3

FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K..SARATH

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 20843 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Sri G. Ravi Mohan, S/o. Sn.G. Bikshpathy, Aged about 57 years, Occ. Advocate, No.182 residing at H.No 16-11-405, Plot No.1 1 9, SBI Officers Colony, [\iloosarambagh, Hyderabad-500036

¶9

2 Smt.G. Padma, Wo Sri. G. Ravi Mohan, aged about 55 years, Occ. Housewife, Both No.'182 residing at H.No.16-1 1-405, Plot No 119, SBI Officers Colony, Moosarambagh, Hyderabad-S00036

¶10

...PETITIONERS

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department (Stamps and Registration) Secretariat, Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶13

2 The District Registrar, Red Hills, Hyderabad, Hyderabad District, Telangana. .) The Sub-Registrar, Bowenpally, Secunderabad. Telangana.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

¶16

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 the Respondent more particularly the respondent no.3 while refusing to register the sale deed dt 28.05.2025 presented by the Petitioners in respect of Demolished House Surrounded by Compound Wall bearing H.No.PNO 3B/GF (PTIN No PfO4F7822677) (Unique Property ID PT-CB-SECU-2021-07-19194203) New SCB No.5-22-17511, Plot No.38, land admeasuring 376.38 sq.yards. or 314.69 sq.meters, in Survey No.7419, situated in the layout of Shanthinikethan Co-operative Society, Mahindra Hills (Presently known as SEVA MANDAL COLONY) East Marredpally, Secunderabad, Cantonment, Hyderabad ,District-Telangana, as same is illegal, arbitrary and against the provisions of law and consequently direct the respondent no.2 and 3 to receive and register the

¶17

sale deed dt 28.05 .2025 relating to subject property thereby to release the same in accordance with law

¶18

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶19

Petition under Section^'1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased the 2nd and 3rd respondent to receive and register the Sale Deed, Dated 28.05.202s presented by the Petitioners in respect of Demolrshed House Surrounded by Compound Wall bearing H.No.PNO 38/GF (PT|N No.pT04F7822677) (Unique Property lD. PT-CB-SECU-2021-07-19-194203) New SCB No.5-22-17511 , ptot No.38, land admeasuring 376.38 sq.yards. or 314.69 sq.meters, rn Survey No.7419, situated in the layout of Shanthinikethan Co-operative Society, [Vlahindra Hills (Presently known as SEVA MANDAL COLONy) East trrlarredpally, Secunderabad, Cantonment, Hyderabad DistriclTelangana and release the same pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI NARESH KUMAR GORIGE

¶21

counsel ror the Respondents: slvlr'S'SRtYiill!'i*,

¶22

REGrsrRAT,oN

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE K.SARATH

¶25

WRIT PETITION No. 2o843 of 2O2S

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

Heard learned counsel lor the petitioners and Smt S.Sravanthi, learned Assistant Government pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing for the respondents. With their consent, this Writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itseif.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits Lhat the pctitioners questioning the inaction of the rcspondent No.3 refusing to register the sale deed dated 28.05.2025 presented by the petitioners in respect of Iand admeasuring 376.38 Sq. yards surrounded by Compound Wall bearing H.No:p.No.3g/GF (plIN No.PT04F7822627) New SCB No.5_22_175/1, plot No.38 in Survey No.T4 /9 situated in the layout of Shanthinikethan Cooperative Society Mahindra Hills (Presently knorvn as Seva Mandal Colony) East Marredpally, Secunderabad Cantonment, Hyderabad

¶29

SK, J N P 20813 202;

¶30

District, on^{the ground that the State ()overnment ls} claiming the^{subject propertyas 'Governmtrnt land' in} LGC No. 167 of^{1997 .Aggrieved by the :rt:tion of the} Registering^{Authorityin not registering Lhc subjecl} document,^{the presentwrit petitionis hled'}

¶31

Lcarned Counsel^{for the petitioners further} submits that^{the issue involved in thismattel is} connected^{rvith W.P.No.l9106 of 2010, u'hic:l'ris {-tledby} the State Government^{against the order in LGC'No'167 of} 1997 passcd by^{the Special Court under the A'P Land} Grabbing^{(Prohibition) Act, 1982, Hyderatradand the} same was dismissed^{by the DivisionBenchof this Court} on 28.05.2025.^{Therefore, learnedcounsel requesl.edthis} Court to allou-^{the u'ritpetition bydirecting the} respondent No.3/Sub-Rcgistrar^{to registerthe Sale Deed} prcscnted by lhe Pclil^ioners'

¶32

C)n the other hand,^{the learnedAssistant} Government^{Pleaderfor Stampsand Registration has not} disputed the^{subrnission made by the learned counselfor} the petitioners.

SK, J wP 20843 2025

I t

In view of the submissions made by both the sides and in view of dismissal of the W.P.No.19106 of 2010 on 28.05.2025, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.3/Sub-Registrar to receive, register and release the document presented by the petitioners in respect of subject property without relcrence to LGC No.167 of 1997, subject to the petitioners complying with the provisions of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, and Indian Stamps Act, 1899. It is also open to the Registering Authority to refuse the document presented by the petitioners, if any other objections, by duly assigning the reasons and communicate the same to the petitioners.

¶38

It is made clear that mere registration of the document does not confcr titie on the subject property and it is also made clear that this order would not have any bearing on all those matters where title/rights of the partles are pending before the authorities either in revision/appeals for adjudication and in any other cases This order also does not preclude the parties in asserting

¶39

¶40

SK. .' \,P 2084 i.i 2025

¶41

their rights before a compctent Court^{of lau'. Howe..'er,}

¶42

there shall be no order^{as to costs.}

¶43

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pcndii-ig in^this

¶44

writ petition shall stand^closed

¶45

SD/.P. PONNA KRISHNA SI TANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

ECTION OFFICER

To,

The Pnncipal Secretary, Revenue Department (Stamps and Registration) Secretariat, State of Telangana, Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶50

2 The District Registrar, Red Hills, Hyderabad, Hyderabad District, Telangana

¶51

The Sub-Registrar, Bowenpally, Secunderabad. Telangana.

¶52

One CC to SRI NARESH KUMAR GOR|GE, Advocate. IOPUC]

¶53

Two CCs to GP FOR STAIVPS AND REGISTRATION, High Court for the State of Telangana [OUT]

¶54

6 Two CD Copies.

BSK BS

t I

HIGH COURT

DATED:18t07t2025

ORDER

WP.No.20843 ot 2025

')r
(o
.j
3 0 luL ?0[
</
r)r I

¶63

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS (Ana ,/'^vl"s'

Sri. G. Ravi Mohan v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. G. Ravi Mohan 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

K Vijaya Mohan, Secbad Vs the State of Telangana and 3 Others

Toorpinti Sreenu Vs The State of Telangana

A.Srinivasa Reddy, Vs Prl.Secy., Revenue Dept.,(Stamps and Regis.,) Hyd., and 3 Other

Boddu Kishan Vs Sri N.Sridhar, I.A.S.

Appari Subrahmanyeswara Rao Vs Prasanna

Pioneers India Vs The State of Telangana