Back
In the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad
S.V. BHATT, J.
C. Radhakrishnama Naidu & Others – Appellants
Versus
The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Registration) Department, Secretariat & Others – Respondents
Writ Petition Nos. 24587 of 2014, 31074 of 2014, 24629 of 2014, 24989 of 2014, 27046 of 2014, 27140 of 2014, 27279 of 2014, 27301 of 2014, 18835 of 2014, 11858 of 2014, 4917 of 2014, 20039 of 2014, 35090 of 2014, 36290 of 2014, 36573 of 2014, 36584 of 2014, 36693 of 2014, 36701 of 2014, 36711 of 2014, 35792 of 2014, 39183 of 2014 & 41141 of 2014
Decided on : 01-06-2015
Andhra Pradesh (Abolition and Conversion Act, 1956 – Section 3(3) –Batch of writ petitions – Grievance of the petitioners is against letter forwarded by the Commissioner Endowments/2nd respondent to the 4th respondent under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 prohibiting registration of documents of properties covered by the list appended to the letter dated 19.04.2010. The subject matter of the writ petitions is house plots covered by Village Accounts Revenue Division District further stated that consequent upon the decision of Estates Abolition Tribunal in Appeal Andhra Pradesh (Abolition and Conversion into Act, 1956 was implemented in conducted enquiry under Section 3(3) of the Andhra Pradesh (Abolition and Conversion Act, 1956 and decided that the land in Survey is held by an institution vide order dated Against the order dated 15.09.1983, one Reddy filed appeal before, the appeal filed Reddy was allowed setting aside the order dated holding Survey No.242 as held by institution. The 5th respondent carried the matter in revision before the Commissioner, Survey and Settlement and Land Records, Hyderabad. The revision in case No.P3/1688/84 was allowed on setting aside the order dated of R.D.O matter was remanded for enquiry and disposal by purpose of reference to above circumstances is to contend that the order holding the property as held by institution is subsisting and the petitioners and their predecessors- in-interest – Held, Total prohibition from registration of a document results in anomalous situation or in the working of the Registration Act. Without adjudication of an alleged fact-in-issue contrary to other applicable enactments on Transfer of Property amounts to adjudication of disputed claims through executive fiat and would be contrary to Article 300-A of Constitution of India. Therefore, the words ‘prohibition for registration’ or ‘prohibited from registration’ are interpreted or construed to mean that the registration and the caveat of interest or claim for prohibition received by the Registration Department from Government/ Endowment etc. under Section 22-A (1) and (2) of the Act are endorsed on the document by the Registration Department, as the case may be. To wit for giving effect to Section 17(1) and Section 22-A of the Act, the Registration Department while considering a document attracting Section 22-A of the Act, registers and endorses the details or caveat of interest on the property, received from Government/Endowment registration along with such endorsement on the document achieves the object of Prohibition of Registration of a document under Section 22-A of the Act and puts the purchaser or beneficiary on notice of such claims. 5. The notification, even if published and forwarded to Registration Department, has the same meaning and purpose as interpreted for Section 22-A (1) (a) to ((d) of the Act and the details are taken note in the same manner by including the details of notification in the registration – Application is dismissed.
The petitioners in these writ petitions are different individuals and the respondents are common. The pleadings set out by parties in W.P.No.24587 of 2014 are referred to and would suffice for the disposal of this batch of writ petitions. The grievance of the petitioners is against letter Rc.No.N1/27520/2009 dated 19.04.2010 forwarded by the Commissioner Endowments/2nd respondent to the 4th respondent under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short ‘the Act’) prohibiting registration of documents of properties covered by the list appended to the letter dated 19.04.2010. The subject matter of the writ petitions is house plots covered by Patta No.130, Paimash No.10, Survey No.242 of Tiruchanur Village Accounts, Tirupathi Revenue Division, Chittoor District.
The petitioners pray for Mandamus declaring the action of 4th respondent in refusing registration of the sale deed(s) for house plot Nos.156, 322, 323, 157 part and 158 part and plot Nos.156 (part) and 157 (part) covered by Patta No.30 located in Paimash No.10 (Survey No.242) of Tiruchanur Village Accounts presented by petitioners by reference to letter Rc.No.N1/27520/2009 dated 19.04.2010 without notification under Section 22-A of the Act, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the Act. The petitioners pray for a direction to 4th respondent to receive and register the documents covered by Survey No.242of Tiruchanur Village Accounts in accordance with law and without reference to letter Rc.No.N1/27520/2009 dated 19.04.2010.
The issue of law arises under Section 22-A of the Act.
The case of petitioners is that Survey No.242 is a private patta land. One Sannadhi Muni Reddy filed O.S. No.8 of 1934 in the Court of District Judge, Chittoor against one M.K. Ramaswamy Ayyangar and others for recovery of amount due under a mortgage deed. The suit was decreed and the property was put to execution in O.E.P.No.6 of 1943. In O.E.P. No.6 of 1943, the decree holder purchased the E.P. schedule property. On 27.04.1946, sale certificate was issued in favour of Sannadhi Muni Reddy. The E.P. schedule property is as follows:
“(1) Chittoor-Kadapa District- Chiruthanur Old Agraharam Chitteti Gunta Patteda- lands-bounded on
East by - the road leading to Tirupati and the lands cultivated under Oburaju Kalva:
West by - Avilala Village boundary;
North by - the lands of Venkatapuram Agraharam Revenue village (Vallerugunta Patteda lands)
South by - the lands of Tiruchanur and Old Agraharam called as Chitteti lands:
Within the said boundaries, an extent of Ac.21.25 cents and an extent of Ac.11.25 cents- totaling Ac.32.50 cents- with all irrigation rights in water channels and water rights in tank along with trees therein-
1. Chittoor- Kadapa District-Chiruthanur Old Agraharam Chitterti Gunta Patteda- lands- bounded on East by : Bandi Baata leading to Tanapalle;
West by : the lands of Tiruchanur Agraharam Revenue village;
North by : Daaminedu Kalva (Channel); and
South by :……………………………
Within the said boundaries, an extent of Ac.6.00 cents with all trees such as Neem, Tati, Eetha etc., Wells therein, sheds etc.,”
The petitioners contend that the property referred to above is identifiable with Paimash No.10 and correlated to Survey No.242 of Tiruchanur Village Accounts.
From the year 1957 onwards, Survey No.242 has been subjected to a series of registered transactions of sale and purchase as private patta land. Survey No.242 was and is private property or patta land of Muni Reddy. In due course, Survey No.242 was developed into a residential layout and sold to several persons as house plots. The details of house plots purchased by the petitioners in W.P.No.24587 of 2014 are as follows:
| Sl. No. | Name of the petitioner | Sy. No.& Plot No. | Extent | Link documents (sale deeds) |
| 1 | Sri Radhakrishna Naidu | 242/156 part | 370 sq.yards | 2389/1997 and 2390/97 |
| 2 | Sriramaneni Krishnamurthy | 242/322 | ||
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
