2011 (4) ALT 82
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
P.V. SANJA Y KUMAR, J.
T.Yedukondalu – Appellant
v.
Principal Secretary to Government, Department of Revenue, Stamps & Registration and others – Respondent
Writ Petition No.27752 of 2009
Decided on: 15-03-2011
B) REGISTRATION ACT, 1908, Section 22-A (b) (as substituted by Act No.19/2007) - Registration Act, 1908, Section 22-A (1), (2) (prior to its substitution under No.19/2007):- Wherever Government wish to stake claim in respect of any land and prohibit any document presented to the sub-Registrar to b registered, the full details, address and particulars shall be prescribed in a Notification issued under Section 22-A duly published. In the present case, there is no dispute that no such notification has been published under Section 22-A(2) of the Act of 1908 in respect of the subject land. (Para 11)
C) REGISTRATION ACT, 1908, Section 22-A (1) (Prior to its amendment under Act No.19/2007) - Registration Act, 1908, Section 22-A (as substituted by Act No.19/2007) -
Notification issued purportedly under the old provision which is repealed and which purports to prohibit registration of documents of certain properties issued on grounds of public policy is not sustainable. (Para 15)
The petitioner assail the action of the Sub-Registrar of Stamps and Assurances shameerpet Ranga Reddy District, the third respondent in not entertaining documents for registration in respect of his land in Survey No.956 of Jawahar Nagar Village and Gram Panchayat Shameerpet Mandal Ranga Reddy District.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that he purchased an extent of Ac.5.00 cents in Survey No.956 of Jawahar Nagar Village in the year 2007 Being desirous of selling the said land the petitioner approached the registration authorities but was informed that registration of documents in respect of the said land was prohibited. It is his case that his land is neither Government land nor assigned land and that prohibition in respect of registration could not be applied to it. Hence the present writ petition
3. The Sub-Registrar Shameerpet, the third respondent stated in her counter that the petitioner had applied for information as to the market value of the land in Survey No.956 of Jawahar Nagar Village and that her office had informed him that the subject land was Government land and therefore no value exists in respect thereof in the basic value register. She further stated that the District Collector Ranga Reddy under letter dated 08.07.2008 furnished the District Registrar Ranga Reddy the second respondent with a list of Government lands. As per this list Survey No.956 was notified as Government land. Reliance was placed upon G.O.Ms.No.786, Revenue (Registration-I) Department, dated 09.11.1999, a notification issued under the old Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 (for brevity the Act of 1908). According to the Sub-Registrar Shameerpet, notwithstanding the substitution of Section 22-A of the Act of 1908 under Act No.19 of 2007, the notifications issued under the erstwhile provision would still continue to operate. She concluded by stating that the petitioner had not presented his document for registration and therefore no cause arose for filing the present writ petition.
4. The learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent authorities while reiterating the above stand contended that it was not necessary for the Government to issue a notification under Section 22-A (2) of the Act of 1908 as it presently stands. It is his case that once Government land is involved Section 22-A (1) (b) would apply and not Section 22-A (1) (e) of the Act of 1908. He further argued that the notification issued under the erstwhile Section 22-A of the Act of 1908 vide G.O.Ms.No.786 dated 09.11.1999 would continue to operate in view of the validating clause in Act No.19 of 2007 and therefore, the prohibition put in place there under in respect of Survey No.956 of Shameerpet Mandal Ranga Reddy District would continue to be operative notwithstanding the substitution of the provision. He further stated that as the petitioner had not presented his document for registration occasion did not arise for him to file the present case and that, if the petitioner presented his document it would be considered and necessary action would be taken under Section 71 of the Act of 1908.
5. This Court, however, does not find merit in the contentions advanced by the learned Government Pleader.
6. With regard to the objection as to the maintainability of the writ petition, the counter filed by the Sub-Registrar Shameerpet makes it clear that the petitioner document, if presented for registration, is bound to be rejected. That being so this Court is not impressed with the submission that the petitioner should be driven to suffer an order under Section 71 of the Act of 1908 and again made to approach this Court thereafter Once the stand of the respondents is apparent this Court is not barred from considering the issue notwithstanding the fact that the petitioner did not present his document for registration as yet. In any event, the cause of action arose upon the refusal by the registration authorities to furnish to the petitioner the market valu
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.