IMPORTANT POINT
The court affirmed that a valid registered deed of gift transfers ownership, overriding subsequent claims unless legally challenged.

ORDER :

R. Raghunandan Rao, J.

Heard Sri O. Manohar Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants and Sri Siva Sankar, learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 8.

2. Respondents 1 to 8 had approached this Court by way of W.P.No.41019 of 2018. The contention of respondents 1 to 8 was that they were the owners of Ac.15.42 cents in Sy.No.143 of Kodimi Village, Ananthapuram District, and the Sub-Registrar was refusing to receive and register the document of alienation being presented by them in relation to this land. Respondents 1 to 8 contended that such refusal, in the absence of the land being included in the list of prohibited property under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short ‘the Act’), is arbitrary, illegal and in violation of the provisions of the Registration Act.

3. A learned Single Judge of the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, by judgment dated 14.11.2018, had disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the Sub-Registrar to receive and register the documents presented by respondents 1 to 8, if they are in accordance with the Indian Stamp Act and Registration Act, and without reference to the entries in adangal if the subject land is not listed under any prohibited properties, under Section 22-A of the Act.

4. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellants herein, who are third parties to the writ petition and who are residents of the village, have filed the present appeal after obtaining leave of this Court.

5. Sri O. Manohar Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants would contend that the land in question does not belong to respondents 1 to 8, and in fact, belongs to the Anjaneyaswamy Temple in the village. He would contend that late Sri Talari Peddanna Gari Sanjeevappa, who is owner of this land and the person through whom respondents 1 to 8 are claiming title, had gifted the said property to the temple, by way of a registered deed of gift, dated 16.01.1936. The said deed of gift was registered as document No.80/1936, in Book-1, Volume-24, before the Sub-Registrar, Ananthapur. Sri O. Manohar Reddy would also draw the attention of this Court to the proceedings of the Joint Collector, Ananthapur, dated 15.03.2018. These proceedings were a revision sought by Sri T.V. Ramudu under the provisions of Section 9 of the Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971, for rectification of the names of the descendents of late Sri Talari Peddanna Gari Sanjeevappa in the revenue records, to the extent of Ac.15.42 cents in Sy.No.143. The Joint Collector, after going through the record, had held that there was a claim by the endowments department over the said land on the basis of a revenue entry in the adangal for the year 2005 and that the earlier requests of the revision petitioners, before the Tahsildar, Ananthapur, had been rejected on the ground that the 10-1, Chitta of Kodimi Village, records the land in the name of Sri Anjaneyaswamy Temple and that mutation in favour of the revision petitioners therein could be done only if required documents could be produced.

6. Sri O. Manohar Reddy, would contend that these two facts are sufficient to show that respondents 1 to 8 have no title over the land and are only seeking to sell away the land, which was already been gifted by their ancestors.

7. Sri P. Siva Sankar, learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 8 would submit that a counter had already been filed in the writ appeal. The learned counsel would submit that the writ appeal is not maintainable as the appellants had no locus sandi in filing the appeal. He submits that the appellants had no claim over the land and that they are only seeking to illegally obtain the said land for their own purposes. He would further submit that he has also placed before this Court, an endorsement said to have been issued by the Tahsildar, Ananthapur, dated 25.06.2015, as well as a proceeding of the Assistant Commis