Telangana High Court
WP/26472/2006 of Bazarinti Madamanchi Ramajnaneyulu, Vs The Sub-Registrar, on 26 December 2006
SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.26472 of 2006 Dated: 26.12.2006 Between: Bazarinti Madamanchi Ramajnaneyulu and others. ..... PETITIONERSS AND The Sub-Registrar, Sabbavaram, Visakhapatnam, and another. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO WRIT PETITION No.26472 of
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO
WRIT PETITION No.26472 of 2006
Dated: 26.12.2006
Between:Bazarinti Madamanchi Ramajnaneyulu and others.
.....PETITIONERSS
ANDThe Sub-Registrar, Sabbavaram, Visakhapatnam, and another ......RESPONDENTS
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAOWRIT PETITION No.26472 of 2006
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The petitioners, having purchased different extents of land insurvey No.1/2 situated at Gullepalli Village of Sabbavaram Mandal inVisakhapatnam, from Tadipatri Satyanarayana and others, underdifferent registered agreements of sale-cum-General Power of Attorneys,presented the documents for registration before respondent No.1, whokept the same pending without any valid reason. Aggrieved by thesame, the present writ petition is filed.
Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learnedAssistant Government Pleader for Revenue (General-A). It is no doubttrue that when a document is presented, it is incumbent on the part of theRegistering Officer to examine the same with reference to Sections 31and 36 of the Registration Act, 1908 (the Act, for brevity) and/or Rules 26and 58 of the Andhra Pradesh Rules under the Act. This aspect of thematter was considered by my learned brother Hon’ble Sri JusticeA.Gopal Reddy in W.P.No.15199 of 2004 dated 01.09.2004.
Following the above, this writ petition is disposed of directingrespondent No.1 or any other Registering Officer to accept thedocuments presented by the petitioners and to consider the same forregistration. Be it noted, if for any reason, the documents presented arenot registered, it is incumbent on the part of the Registering Officer torecord and furnish reasons under Section 71 of the Act. Even thereafter,if the petitioners have any grievance, they may file an appeal before theAppellate Authority i.e., District Registrar under Section 72 of the Act. Thereafter, if any adverse order is passed by the Appellate Authority, thepetitioners can file suit under Section 77 of the Act. No costs.
_____________
(V.V.S.RAO, J)
26[th] December, 2006Note: Issue CC by 29.12.2006.B/oghnNote: Issue CC by 29.12.2006.B/oghn