Telangana High Court
CC/1081/2012 of P. Raghu Nath Reddy Vs P.Venkateshwara Reddy, on 28 December 2012
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWELVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CONTEMPT CASE No.1081 of 2012 BETWEEN: P. Raghu Nath Reddy. ... PETITIONER AND P. Venkateshwara Reddy, Sub-Registrar, Proddatur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWELVE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR
CONTEMPT CASE No.1081 of 2012
BETWEEN:
P. Raghu Nath Reddy.
AND
... PETITIONER
P. Venkateshwara Reddy, Sub-Registrar, Proddatur Mandal, KadapaDistrict.
...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Petitioner: MS. P. RAJANI REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent: GP FOR REVENUE
The Court made the following:
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:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learnedGovernment Pleader appearing for the respondent.
2. This Court issued directions in WPMP.No.22819 of 2011 inWP.No.18896 of 2011 dated 13.07.2011 wherein the Registering Authority’srefusal to receive documents presented was found to be, prima facie,unjustified and accordingly, the Registering Authority was directed to receive, entertain and process the documents presented by the petitioner forregistration.
3. In the present contempt case, it is alleged that on the self-samegrounds, which are impugned in the writ petition, the respondent has againissued a refusal order dated 07.05.2012 intimating refusal to register thedocuments. The action of the respondent in refusing to register thedocuments on the self-same grounds is questioned in this contempt case.
4. Learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the saidRegistrar concerned shall freshly consider the documents, if presented, for registration by the petitioner and seeks leave to withdraw theproceedings issued by the Joint Sub-Registrar-1, Proddatur dated07.05.2012. Accordingly leave as prayed for is granted and the saidproceedings dated 7.5.2012 shall stand withdrawn.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission of the learned GovernmentPleader nothing further survives for consideration in the contempt case.Petitioner shall be at liberty to present the documents afresh, which shall beconsidered by the respondent, as already directed.
The contempt case is dismissed. The miscellaneous applications, ifany, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
_____________________
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J