Telangana High Court

WP/40982/2014 of Botcha Eswara Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 31 December 2014

Cites 0, Cited by 0

SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.40982 of 2014 Dated : 31.12.2014 Between: Botcha Eswara Rao S/o.Taviti Naidu, Age 39 yrs, Occu : Mechanic, R/o.Rajula Veedhi, Gumadam Village, Salur Mandal, Vizianagaram District & another. .. Petitioners And The State of Andhra Pradesh,

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

WRIT PETITION No.40982 of2014

Dated : 31.12.2014

Between:

Botcha Eswara Rao S/o.Taviti Naidu,Age 39 yrs, Occu : Mechanic,R/o.Rajula Veedhi, Gumadam Village,Salur Mandal, Vizianagaram District & another.

.. Petitioners

And

The State of Andhra Pradesh,Rep., by its Principal Secretary,Registration and Stamps (Revenue) Department,Secretariat, Hyderabad & 4 others .. Respondents This Court made the following :

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

WRIT PETITION No.40982 of 2014

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

ORDER:

The case of the petitioners in this writ petition is that they have enteredinto an agreement to purchase the house property bearing D.No.27-50 in SurveyNo.159/2, Old Assessment No.5-377, New Assessment No.1092002371situated at Aguru Veedhi, Old Ward No.4 (New Ward No.9), Salur Village &Municipality, Vizianagaram District, for a sale consideration. Accordingly, whenthe petitioners along with their vendors approached the Sub-Registrar, Salur,Vizianagaram District (3[rd] respondent), requesting him to furnish stamp duty andregistration charges and permit him to present the deed of conveyance, the 3[rd]respondent refused to receive and process the same on the ground that theproperty is classified as ‘Government land’ and cannot be permitted forregistration as per the communication furnished by the revenue authorities.

2. When the matter is taken up for consideration, learned counsel for thepetitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and the learnedStanding Counsel for Municipality, represented that the subject matter of this writpetition is covered by the decision of this Court rendered in W.P.No.1339 of 2014and batch.

3. In W.P.No.1339 of 2014 and batch, after construing the provisions inSection 2(1) of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905, the proceedings issuedby the District Collector, Kadapa in Circular Reference No.E3/1291/2007, dated29.04.2007, G.O.Ms.100, dated 22.02.2014, and earlier decision of this Court inW.P.No.23634 of 2012 and batch, this Court held as under :

“As evident from the Circular of the District Collector,Kadapa, and the Orders of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.100 dated 22.02.2014, the lands classified asGramakantham are not the Government lands and thatthere is no restraint for alienation of the said properties. Thus, the decision of the Sub-Registrar in refusing toentertain the deed of conveyance concerning theproperties in Sy.Nos.159/2 and 162/2 of Salur Municipalityis erroneous.”

4. Following the earlier decision of this Court concerning Survey Nos.159/2and 162/2, falling within the Salur Municipal Limits, this writ petition is alsodisposed of directing the Sub-Registrar (3[rd] respondent) to furnish stamp dutyand registration charges concerning the property in Survey No.159/2 of SalurMunicipality and to receive and process the deed of conveyance, as and whenpresented by the petitioners, in accordance with Indian Registration Act, 1908and Indian Stamp Act, 1899, without raising the objection that the land isclassified as Government land. The Sub-Registrar, shall complete registrationformalities, if the document is otherwise, in order and release the same. If theSub-Registrar, has any other valid reason for not entertaining the document, heshall pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the parties. Thereshall be no order as to costs.

5. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall standclosed.

__________________

P.NAVEEN RAO,J

31[st] December, 2014Rds

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead