Telangana High Court
CC/1131/2009 of M Satyamma Vs Sri Devanand on 31 December 2009
SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA CONTEMPT CASE No.1131 of 2009 ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed complaining willful disobedience on the part of the respondent in implementing the order, dated 08.01.2008 made in W.P.No.337 of 2008, wherein this Court while disposing of the writ petition directed the
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.
Conclusion
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
CONTEMPT CASE No.1131 of 2009
ORDER:
This Contempt Case is filed complaining willful disobedienceon the part of the respondent in implementing the order, dated08.01.2008 made in W.P.No.337 of 2008, wherein this Court whiledisposing of the writ petition directed the respondent as under:
“The respondent, namely the Sub-Registrar,Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy district, is directed toreceive and process the document to besubmitted by the petitioner for registration of landadmeasuring Ac.2.00 guntas, situated in SurveyNo.283/33 of Abdullapur Village, HayathnagarMandal, Ranga Reddy District, in accordance withthe provisions of the Stamps and Registration Act,1908, expeditiously. In the event, if there are anyobjections for registering the said document, it isopen for the respondent to make an endorsementto that effect, record reasons and communicatethe same to the petitioner.”
There is no necessity of going into all the details.
In the additional counter-affidavit filed on behalf of therespondent, it is stated that the petitioner submitted the document on20.10.2009 before the In-charge Sub Registrar as he was on leave;that his office addressed a letter to the Revenue Divisional Officer,Ranga Reddy (East) seeking clarification whether the land intends totransfer through the present document is a prohibited property or not;that as no clarification is received, he examined the document withreference to the list of Government/Assigned lands furnished by theCollector, Ranga Reddy in Memo No.423/E/2009, dated 21.02.2009and passed an order on 09.11.2009 intimating refusal of document,and therefore, he has not violated the impugned order.
In view of the above, no further orders need be passed in thisContempt Case and the same is accordingly closed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to question the order dated 09.11.2009 passedby the respondent, before appropriate forum, if he is so advised.
Dated 31.12.2009va
N.V.RAMANA, J