Telangana High Court
WP/40288/2012 of Tanneru Singaiah Vs Government of A.P. rep by its Principal Secretary to on 31 December 2012
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.40288 of 2012 Date : 31-12-2012 Between: Tanneru Singaiah .. Petitioner And Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary To Revenue (Registration & Stamps) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents Counsel for
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY
W.P.No.40288 of 2012Date : 31-12-2012
Between:
Tanneru Singaiah .. Petitioner
And
Government of Andhra Pradesh,represented by its Principal SecretaryTo Revenue (Registration & Stamps)Department, Secretariat, Hyderabadandothers ..Respondents Counsel for petitioner : Sri K. Satyanarayana MurthyCounsel for respondents : Assistant Government Pleader forRevenue
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 action of respondent No.4 in not receiving the documentsought to be presented by the petitioner for registration in respect ofPlot No.971 in Sy.No.19 of Iswarya Residency, admeasuring 122 sq.yards, basing on letter dated 10-5-2012 of respondent No.2, isassailed in this Writ Petition.
I have heard Sri K. Satyanarayana Murthy, learned Counselfor the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader forRevenue.
In G. Narasaiah Vs. State of A.P.[[1]],a Division Bench ofthis Courtheld thatthere is no provision under the Registration Act,1908, which would empower the Sub-Registrar to refuse to entertainany document for registration on the direction of a functionary of theState Government, that the Revenue Divisional Officer of theRevenue Department or any other official of the Registration &Stamps Department has no control over the Sub-Registrar and thatthey are not empowered to give a direction to the latter not toentertain the document.
In view of this authoritative pronouncement, respondent No.4is directed to entertain the document that may be presented by thepetitioner for registration without reference and regard to letter dated10-5-2012 of respondent No.2 and process the same for registrationstrictly in terms of Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908.
Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposedof.
As a sequel, WPMP No.51121 of 2012 is disposed of asinfructuous.
Date : 31-12-2012AM
_________________________Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy [1] 2011(3) ALT 415 (D.B.)