Writ petition filed by a partner of a firm seeking individual mutation of his share in land purchased by the firm. Court held that without partition proceedings, the petitioner cannot claim individual mutation. Petition disposed of with clarification.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[3168 ]
\
IN THE HIGH COURTFOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (SPecial OriginalJurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THESEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTYFIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLESRIJUSTICEK.LAKSHMAN
WRIT PETITION NO:2333 60F 2025
Betvveen:
P.Kruoaiah, S/o.Jangaiah,Aged about49 years-, Occ Business'Fl/o H.No.3;d i;;;;A; ritiige"t urahlm6atnamMandal, R' R District'
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition underArlicle 226 of the Constitutionof lndia praying that in the circumstancesstated in the affidavitfiledtherewith' the High Courtmay be pleased to issue appropriatewrit or order or direction more particularly one in the natureofWRlToFMANDAMUSdeclaringtheactionofofficialrespondentsinnot issuing thepattadar passbooks as well as mutatethe nameof the petitioner in the revenuerecordsaSpertheDharaniapplicationNos.25000l2,lg0datedlSlT12025' 2500012260da|ed19-7-2025'2500012167daled18-7-2025,2500012269dated 1g-7 -2025 submittedby the petitioner throughTN/-03Moduleor online to an extent ofAc.1.00inSy.No.473lAAl2t1'Ac.1-37gtsinSy.No,473tEt2admAc.1-225gtsin
Sy.No.473lA/2 adm Ac.0-37 gts in Sy.No.473l2A adm Ac.0_05 gts in SyNo.473lAA/2 adm Ac.0-175 gts in Sy.No.473lAA/2r2 adm Ac.0-06 gts in Sy.No.473lUU1 total Ac.6-04 gts situated at rhimmapur village, Kandukur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law, unlaMul and violation of relangana Rights in Land and pattadar Books Act, 2020 -consequently violation of the Telangana Bhu Bharathi (Record of Rights) in Land) Rules, 2025 and violation of Article 3004 of the constitution of lndia, and consequently drrect the official respondents to issue the pattadar passbooks as well as mutate the name of the petitioner in the revenue records as per the Dharani application name of the petitioner in the revenue records as per the Dharani application 2s0oo12167 dated 18-7-202s, 2soooi2269 dated 1g-7-2o2s submitted by the petitioner through r/-03 Module or online to an extent of Ac.1-00 in sy.No-473/AAr2ri, Ac-1-37 gts in sy.No .473rEt2 adm Ac.1-225 gts in Sy.No.473lA/2 adm Ac.0-37 gts in Sy.No.473l2A adm Ac.0_05 gts in sv.No.473lAA/2 adm Ac.0-175 gts in Sy.No.473lAA/2t2 adm Ac.0-06 gts in Sy.No.473lUU1 total Ac.6-05 gts situated at rhimmapur village, Kandukur lVlandar, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State.
lA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Section 15r 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 respondents No.1 to 4 to not to take any further proceedings in respect of Ac.1-00 in Sv.No.473lAAt2r1. Ac.1-37 gts in sy.No.4r3lEr2 adm Ac..r-225 gts in Sy.No.473lA/2 adm Ac.O-37 gts in Sy.No.473l2A adm Ac.O-05 gts tn Sy.No.473lAAi2 adm Ac.O-115 gts in Sy.No.473lAAl2l2 adm Ac.O-06 gts tn Sy.No.473lUU1 total Ac.6-04 gts situated at rhimmapur village, Kandukur [/andar, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt DR. KADIRI KRISHNAIAH
Counsel forthe Respondents: SRI L. RAVINDER AGp FOR REVENUE
The Court made the following: ORDER
HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.23336 OF 2025
ORAL ORDER:
Heard Dr. Kadire Krishnaiah, leamed counsel for the petitioner and Mr. L. Ravinder, learned Assistant Govemment Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of respondentNos. I to5.
Kandukur Mandal, Rangareddy District, under three registeredsale deeds bearing document Nos.2617 of 2018,3465 of201 8and 3665
2
KI. J W P No 21116 of2025
of 2018, dated 22.02.20t8.06.03.2018 and Og.O3.2Ot7, respectively.'l'hereafter. the said Firm represented by the petitioner has submitted online applications vlde I.D. Nos.2500Ol2lg}, 2500012260- 2500012167 and 2500012269, dared 18.07.2025, 19.07 .2025. 18.07 .2025 and, 19.07 .2025 to respondenr No.4 with a request to mutate its name in revenue records and issue e-pattadar passbooks. Vide proceedings dated 26.07.2025, respondent No.5 recommended mutation of the said Firm name in revenue records and issue of e-pattadar passbooks. Even then, respondent No.4 is not procceding further. Thereforc, the pctitioner filed the present writ petition.
ftIt is apt to nore tha[ Mr. P. Krupaiah,one of the partners of M/s. K.K. Pro.jects. filed the present writ petition. He is seeking mutation of his name in revenue records in respect of his 50% share in the atbresaid lands in terms of Partnership Deed, dated 29.11.2017. As discussed above. M/s. K.K. projects represented by the petitioncr herein and respondent No.6 being partners purchased thc subject property undcr the aforesaid three sale deeds. The said propertv is not partitioned bchveen them. Therefore, the petitioner, one of the partners of M/s. K.K. projects, cannot seek foi- rnatarion of his name in rcspecr ol his 50% sharc in the
(L, J W P No2li16oi202i
3
I
aforesaidpropcrry' As discussed above' IM/s' K'K' Projects representedby the petitioner herein in the capacity of partnerof the said firmhas submitted the aforesaidonline applications seeking mutationfbrissuanceofe-pattadarpassbookinrespectofM/s. K.K. Projectsare pending withrespondent No'3 'RespondentNo'4 has alreadYsubmitted his report'
f,Therefore,the petitioneris not entitted for mutation of his name inrevenuerecordsin respectof 50Vo of the aforesaid propertywithoutobtaining partitionproceedingsin respectof the atbresaidproperty. tn the tight of the same' respondentNo'3 is directedto consider the aforesaid onlineapplications submittedby M/s. K.K.Projects and disposeof the same strictly in accordance with law.Ilowever, the petitioner in his individualcapacity cannot mutatehis name in revenue records in respect of the subject propcrty belongsto M/s- K'K' Projects' If the petitionerwants mutationof his name in respect of 50% of the subjectproperry' he has toget partitionof thc subject property'he has to approach the competentauthorityas mentionedin Schedule 'A' of the Bhu Bharati(Recordof Rightsin Land) Rutes' 2025' It is for the competent authorityto consider the said request of the pctitioner in
1
KL, J lv P No 2l:)36 of2o25
I i 'i I I
4
accordancc with law..fherefore. thc petitioner is not entitled for
any relief
As a scqucl thereto. miscellaneous petil.ions.. if any pending
in the writ petition shall stand closed
\
SD/- M. NAGAMANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// Wr-
SECTTON OFFICER
To,
Hyderabad [OUT] 8. Two CD Copies TJ GJP
HIGH COURT
DATED:07 t0Bt2O2S
ORDER
WP.No.23336 of 2O2S
,,ra.\aa
(lt-l. ri
J 02 sEP M ZI
\ -.,
r')
{
4ri;lt rl+
={;--
DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS
aLqlN
1 issue framed by the court
Can a partner of an un-partitioned partnership firm seek individual mutation of his 50% share in revenue records?
3 provisions across 3 enactments
P Krupaiah
State of Telangana
Chief Commissioner of Land Administration
District Collector, Ranga Reddy District
Revenue Divisional Officer, Kandukur
Tahsildar, Kandukur Mandal
K Lakshman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
