Disposed

Sri. Sunkari Venkatesh @ venkataiah v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC11 Feb 2025WP/2991/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged refusal to register his sale deed on the ground that a civil suit over the same land was pending. The court held mere pendency does not bar registration where no injunction operates and directed the registering authority to examine the documents per the Registration and Stamp Acts and pass a reasoned order.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of directing the Tahsildar/Joint Sub-Registrar to examine and process the sale deed registration documents in accordance with law and pass a reasoned order; no costs.

Sri. Sunkari Venkatesh @ venkataiah Vs State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[^32e61

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITI ON NO: 2991 0F 202s

¶8

Between:

¶9

Sri. Sunkari Venkatesh rO venkataiah, S/o.Gouraiah, Aged about. 5g years, private emptovee. R/o -, rloz-j-so'tp.iiInf ' H"i'o' Nobl-sri' sll fu;;;i Colony, Nagole , Hyderabad.

¶10

AND

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

1 3:1,r?,31;1",m%?:i;Juo^{o, its principte secretary, Revenue Depbrtment}

¶13

2 IifrS$t'5::,.",$lector'^{Jansaon lntegrated cottector office,suryapetRoad,} 3 4. . Sunkari The Tahasitdar/Joint sub yadaiah, S/o oourlgg]:trpr, Tharigoppula Manda{, Jangaon District.

¶14

sunr<iiifi ;;;'i\4;;rly::i3f ,.%: j,f i8:f"1ffi ?!t?::,sg:.llJi.,r.

¶15

Ir?tfiiLt:l:ttH.4^{and5 arethe R/o TharisoppulaVilase and} Mandar,

¶16

(R4&R5 are not necessary parties)

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

petition under Articre 226 0t the const,tution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be preased to issue writ order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of writ of mandamus decraring the action of the respondent No 3 refusing to register the sare deed for the rand in survey No. 21rw1 extent ac 1-00 gts situated at Tharigoppula village and mandar, Jangaon district vide endorsement No. 812112025 dared 29t1t2025 0n the ground of respondent No. 3 is arso one of the i:'":",:1":'J";;x':::Jil:,,,"".:T';ff ff '::i::u j;::in: Registration Act 1g0g and arso viorative of articre 14,16 and3,oA of constitution of lndia consequenfly to setaside the same

¶19

IANO:1O F 2025

¶20

PetitionunderSectionl5lcPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstated in the affidavit^{fi|ed in support of the petition,the High court maybe pleasedto} directtherespondentNo3toregisteredandreleasethesaledeedvideDharani slotBookingapplicationNo250004682Tdated2Tlll2o2sforthelandinsurvey No. 21ll(1^{extent ac 100 gts situated at Tharigoppulavillage and Mandal'} Jangaon^{Districtwhile suspending endorsement issuedby the respondentNo 3} videBr21r202s^{dated29t1r2o25 pending disposar of the abovewrit petition}

¶21

Counsel^{for the Petitioner:SRI' GUDI MADHUSUDHAN REDDY}

¶22

Counsel^{for the Respondent Nos' 1to3: AGP FOR REVENUE}

¶23

Counsel^{for the Respondent Nos' 4&5: -}

¶24

The Court^{made the following:ORDER}

¶25

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{C.V. BHASI{AR REDDY} WRIT PETITION No.2991^{of 2025}

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

This writ^{petition is filed seeking to declare the action of} respondent No.3 in^{refusing to registerthe sale deed for the} land in Sy.No.21/K/1,^{to an extent Ac. 1'00 gts', situatedat} Tharigoppula Village^{and Mandal, JangaonDistrictuide} endorsement No.Bl2ll2025,^{dated 29.O1.2025 on the ground} of respondent^{No.3is also one of the respondentin O'S'No'42} of 2025 on the^{file of Principal/AdditionalJuniorCivilJudge,} at Jangaon, as^{illegal, arbitrary and consequently prayedto} set aside the same.

¶28

Considered the submissions^{of learned counsel for the} respective^{parties and with their consent,this writ petition is} disposed of at the^{admission stage.}

¶29

It is stated that the^{petitioneris the absoluteowner and} possessor of agricultural land to^{an extent of Ac'1'14gts', in} Sy.No.21/K/ 1, along with other^{survey numbers, situated at} Tharigoppula Village and Mandal,^{Jangaon District, having} acquired the same^from his father.^{It is further stated that} the-rlfme of the^{petitionerhas been recorded in all the} revenue records and^{pattadar passbooks and title deedshave}

¶30

¶31

CVBR, J Wp 2991 2025

¶32

also been issued in his favour in^respect of the^subject property, as per the provisions of the Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 2O2O. It is further stated that in vievv of hnancial necessities, the^{petitioner intendedto} sell the land to an extent of Ac.1.OO^gts., in Sy.No.21/K/1 and therefore, booked a slot in Dharani web^portal for registration of the said property uide applncation No.25O0046827, dated 25.01.2025 in favour of the prospective purchaser. It is further stated that the purchaser has also paid necessary charges towards registration, stamp duty, mutation, etc., and the petitioner submitted all the documents in support of the claim of ownership. The case of the petitioner is that the Tahsildar/Joint Sub-Registrar has issued Endor sement uide No.B 121 12025, dated 29.O1 .2025, wherein, the registration of the document for the aforesaid extent of land was refused on the ground that respondent Nos.4 and 5 filed a suit uide O.S.No.42 of 2025 on the file of the Principal/Additional Junior Civil Judge, at Jangaon, over the very same subject property, in which the Tahsildar has been involved as one of the respondent and the same pending. Aggr:ieved thereby, the present writ petition is hled.

I I

t/'

-t

CVBR, J Wp 2991 2025

Mr. G. Madhusudan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that in the absence of any injunction orders gralted by the competent Courts prohibiting alienation/ transfer of the property, the Tahsildar/Joint Sub-Registrar is not having any power or authority to refuse to receive the document for registration. Learned counsel further submitted that as per the Standing Orders 219(b)(3) issued by the Registering Authority, the SubRegistrars are not empowered to refuse to receive any documents for registration in the absence of any injunction/restraining orders issued by the competent Courts prohibiting the alienation/ transler of property.

¶39

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 has not disputed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner except stating that the suit instituted by respondent Nos.3 and 4 in respect of the very same subject lands is pending. It is further submitted that as per Rule 58 of the Telangana Rules under the Registration Act, 1908, the Registering Of{icer's are not having any power to enquire into the vatidity of a document brought to him for registration or to attend to any r.dlitten or verbal protest against the registration of a

¶40

¶41

CVtsR, J wp 2991 2025

¶42

document based on the ground that the executing^party had no right to execute the document; but he is bound to consider the objections raised on any of the grounds enumerated therein.

¶43

In view bf the above submissions, as it is stated that there is no injunction operating on the subject property and as it is settled that mere pendency of the cases does not take away the rights of the authority to entertain registrations, this Court is of the opinion that encls of^justice would be met if dhe Tahsildar/Joint Sub-Registrar is directed to. examine the documents presented by the petitioner for registration, if the sarne are complied with all the requirements of the Indian Registration Act, 1908 and Indian Stamp Duty, 1899 and Rules made thereunder and if any of the claims have been submitted on the subject property, consider the claims of the third parties and if there is no injunction order restraining for alienation/transfer of the subject property, the Tahsildar/Joint Sub-Registrar is directed to entertain the documents and if otherwise, the petitioner is not entitled for the same, he shall pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioner in accordance with law.

,/,

CVBR,^J Wp 2991-2025

With the^{aboveobservations,the Writ Petitionis}

¶48

disposed of.^{There shall be no orderas to costs'}

¶49

As a sequel,^{the miscelianeouspetitions pending'if any'} shall stand^closed SD/-A.SRINIVAS^REDDY / ASSISTANT^REGIFTRAR/ d,/

//TRUE^COPY//

SECTIONY'OFFICER

To, 1. The Principle^{Secretary' Revenue Department Secretariat'T'S'Hyderabad} i;id;JtEJ^{cott"ctor office'Suryapet Road'} 2. The District^collector, "ft:;; 1111'#q$,iiplp'ff8.li!g'il[fl^u##ttst]Hn#.r"";:l;. Hvderabad [OUT] o. Two CD^CoPies

/BSK (9?'M "A

CC TODAY

HIGH COURT

DATED:1 110212025

t sE STAI €
Y )
3 14 ttB 2[?5 ?za I
.L
+
DESP!..7 Y,',.

¶59

ORDER