Telangana High Court
WP/27447/2005 of Sri S.M.Jilani, Vs Joint Sub-Registrar-I, Registration and stamps, on 30 December 2005
MR. JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2005 W.P.No. 27447 of 2005 Between:- Sri S.M. Jilani --Petitioner And Joint Sub Registrar-I, Registration and Stamps, Balaji Colony, Tirupati, Chittoor district and two others. --Respondents THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V.V.S.
FRIDAY, THE 30[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER, 2005
W.P.No. 27447 of 2005
Between:-Sri S.M. Jilani
And
--Petitioner
Joint Sub Registrar-I, Registration and Stamps, Balaji Colony, Tirupati, Chittoordistrict and two others.
--Respondents
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V.V.S. RAOW.P.No. 27447 of 2005
:O R D E R:
The petitioner claims to be the owner of the land admeasuring Ac. 01-14 cents insurvey No. 244/1 of Vendanthapuram village, Tirupati rural Mandal in Chittoordistrict, having purchased the same from one K. Srinivas, who in turn had purchasedunder registered sale deed from Pondaiah, who obtained Ryotwari patta from theSettlement Officer. Having entered into an agreement of sale with K. Srinivas, thepetitioner approached the second respondent to enquire the requisite stamp dutypayable for registration of the document. It appears, the second respondent orallyinformed that the property could not be registered as per the executive instructions ofthe third respondent. Therefore, the present writ petition is filed seeking a direction tothe respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to register the property in favour of the petitioner.
This court heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AssistantGovernment Pleader for Revenue (General).
Page 1 of 2
Admittedly, the Government of Andhra Pradesh did not issue any notification underSection 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short ‘the Act’), as amended by theAndhra Pradesh Legislature, and, therefore, the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 could nothave refused to register the document. Further, a Division Bench of this Court, byorder dated 07-12-2005 in W.P.No. 14099 of 2003 and batch, followed the judgmentof the Supreme Court in STATE OF RAJASTHAN v. BASANT NAHATA[1] struckdown Section 22-A of the Act, as inserted by the Andhra Pradesh Legislature in theAct. In view of the above, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to submit the sale deedfor registration duly engrossed on the requisite stamp papers and present it to thesecond respondent. Unless and until there are other objections, the second respondent shall take necessary action in accordance with law.
The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs.
30-12-2005
pvks/*
____________
V.V.S. RAO, J
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…