Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : L.NARSIMHA REDDY
Raghu Praveen - Appellant
Versus
Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada, East Godavari District - Respondent
W.P.N.12865/02
Decided On : 07-25-03
Advocates Appeared :
Mr.P. Gangaiah Naidu
u/Sec.22-A of Registration Act.
Dispute as to title or pendency of proceedings does not confer any right on registering authority to withhold documents - Registering authority is directed to process documents presented and release same if proper stamp duty and registration fee is paid - Writ petition allowed.
( 1 ) THE Convention of Baptist churches of Northern Circars (CBCNC), kakinada, held about Ac. 30. 00 of land in kakinada Town. The land is covered by an educational Institution, Father s Bungalow and Church. The petitioners contend that the CBCNC executed as many as 42 sale deeds alienating the land, which was covered by the Father s Bungalow.
( 2 ) WHEN the documents were presented for registration, the second respondent herein had demanded stamp duty and registration charge, over and above that was paid on the respective documents. Out of 42 purchasers, 15 have complied with such a demand and their respective sale deeds were released after registration. The documents relating to the petitioners herein, 13 in number, and others remained unregistered. The petitioners came forward to deposit the stamp duty and registration charges as demanded, for release of the sale deeds. However, the second respondent refused to accede to the request, on the ground that he has been instructed and informed by the first respondent, the Revenue divisional Officer not to release any sale deeds relating to the land in question. The petitioners challenge the said action and seek a direction to the second respondent, to release the documents duly registering them in accordance with the provisions of the registration Act, 1908.
( 3 ) IN the counter-affidavit the respondents state that the land in question is the property of an Institution by name mc. Laurin High School, which was established by CBCNC. According to the respondents, the school was admitted to grant-in-Aidi and since it committed certain irregularities, proceedings were initiated under the A. P. Education Act for takeover of the management and thereafter the school itself, together with its properties. The respondents contend that the properties are vested in the Government in view of the various proceedings that were initiated under the A. P. Education Act and as such the question of releasing the documents to the petitioners does not arise.
( 4 ) LEARNED Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the second respondent has no authority or jurisdiction to refuse to register and release the documents, once the requisite stamp duty is paid. He submits that the second respondent has no power to go into the question of title and as long as the Government has not issued any notification under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, the second respondent is bound to release the documents, of course, after satisfying himself as to the identity of the persons who have executed the documents. It is also his case that the action of the second respondent amounts to discrimination, inasmuch as 15 out of 42 documents were already released. He places reliance upon the judgments of this Court rendered by learned Single Judges and division Bench.
( 5 ) THE learned Government Pleader for Revenue, on the other hand, submits that the land said to have been purchased by the petitioners is part of the property held by the Mc. Laurin High School. According to him, the effect of proceedings initiated and issued under various provisions of the A. P. Education Act is that the properties are vested in the Government and no transfer can take place contrary to the will of the persons or authority in whom the property is vested, at present.
( 6 ) IT is not in dispute that the CBCNC executed 42 sale deeds in favour of the petitioners and others in the year 1994. The property was held by CBCNC. While the petitioners contend that the land purchased by them was part of Father s Bungalow, the respondents contend that it is the part of the school compound. Hence it is relevant to briefly refer to the various proceedings that have taken place vis-a-vis the school.
( 7 ) THE school was admitted to Grantin-Aid. Certain disputes started and complaints came to be made in the year 1968 itself. The management was required by the Government to pay the salaries to the staff directly. A show-ca
SupremeToday
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.