IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
B Krishna Mohan, J.
S. Padmangabutchamani W/O. S.Venkateswararao - Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Its Principal Secretary(Revenue) And Ors. - Respondents
W.P.No.13820 of 2020 and W.P.No.13447 of 2020
Decided On : 20-12-2025
ORDER :
B Krishna Mohan, J.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
2. This writ petition was filed questioning the intimation letter dated 10.12.2018 of the 4th respondent refusing to register the Document P.No.295 of 2018 as Registration No.28 of 2018 and Document P.No.296 of 2018 as Registration No.29 of 2018 presented for registration by the petitioner in respect of her property to an extent of 360 Sq. yards situated in Plot No.2 and 350 Sq. yards situated in Plot No.7 covered by Sy. Nos.101/1, 101/2, 101/3, 101/4 & 101/5 of Yendada Village of Yendada Gram Panchayat, Vishakhapatnam Rural and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District on the ground that it is notified under section 22A(1)(d) of the Registration Act, 1908 including the ULC proceedings of the Respondent No.5 in C.C. Nos.4324/76 and 4323/76 which resulted in the issuance of the impugned intimation by the Respondent No.4.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 4th respondent issued the impugned intimations dated 10.12.2018 when two gift deeds were presented by the petitioner for registrations on 13.03.2018 by keeping them pending as P.No.295/2018 & P.No.296/2018 and refused to register them as No.28/2018 and 29/2018, dated 10.12.2018 with a further request to prefer an appeal before the District Registrar, Visakhapatnam under section 72(1) of the Registration Act, 1908 within 30 days from the date of the order. The said impugned intimations dated 10.12.2018 were issued on the ground that the said survey number is notified as prohibited under section 22A(1)(d) of the Registration Act, 1908 treating it as ULC land.
4. He also refers to the proceedings of the 5th respondent in C.C.No.7229/1983 dated 28.02.1983 addressed to the declarants by names Nammi Chandraiah, Nammi Appanna and Duvvi Ramulu. According to it, the declarants filed a statement in Form-I u/s.6(1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 and the enquiry reveals that the declarant holds the properties mentioned in the statement appended and it was held that the declarant’s lands are agricultural lands situated within the Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation limits and they are not attracted by the provisions of Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 as long as they are used for agricultural purposes only. The appendix of the said proceedings contains the survey Nos.101/1, 101/2, 101/3, 101/4 & 101/5 with extents Ac.0.95 cents, Ac.0.22 cents, Ac.0.34 cents, Ac.0.20 cents and Ac.0.50 cents respectively with the remarks column as detailed in the said proceedings.
5. He also refers to the sale deed executed by Nammi Chandraiah, Nammi Gangaiah, Nammi Apparao, Nammi Ramulu, Nammi Ramu, Nammi Rambabu, Duvvi Ramulu, Nammi Kunchaiah, Nammi Pentaiah, Nammi Rambabu and Nammi Rama Krishna in favour of Sree Rama Co-operative Building Society Ltd. represented by its Secretary Sri K.S.A.N.Raju dated 17.03.1983 with respect to the scheduled property therein to an extent of Ac.1.69 cents out of Ac.2.21 cents in Sy.Nos.101/1, 101/2, 101/3, 101/4 & 101/5 which further contains that the ULC permission No.CC7229/83, dated 28.02.1983 was filed therein and it is not an assigned land and the value of the property is Rs.22,000/-.
6. The 5th respondent addressed a letter to the 4th respondent dated 31.03.1983 informing that Sree Rama Co-operative Building Society Ltd., Visakhapatnam purchased the land with an extent of Ac.1-69 Gts and Ac.3- 69 Gts covered by Sy.Nos.101/1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and Sy.Nos.109, 110/2 & 110/3 of Yendada Village from the following persons as detailed below:
| S. No | Name of the Village | Survey No. | Extent Ac.Gts. | Name of the person from whom purchased | Document No & Date of Registration |
| 1. | Yendada | 101/1, 2, 3, 4 & 5 | 1-69 | Nammi Chandraiah and others | 2953/83 Dt.17-03-83 |
| 2. | -Do- | 109, 110/2 & 110/3 | 3-69 | Saripalli Apparao etc., | 2412/83 Dt.03-03-83 |
It further contains that the lands hold by the registered Cooperative Societies are exempt from t
AI
Orders issued under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act against deceased individuals are void, and the repeal of the Act removes restrictions on the land in question.
Mandatory statutory notice requirements must be adhered to before claiming possession or refusing registration of documents under the Urban Land Ceiling Act.
Mandatory notice under ULC Act is essential; lack of due process invalidates claims of possession by the state over land.
The requirement of serving notice under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act is mandatory, and failure to comply invalidates the acquisition proceedings.
The court held that disputed questions of title and possession cannot be resolved in a writ petition, and the petitioners were entitled to remain in possession of the land despite ULC proceedings.
An unregistered agreement to sell does not confer ownership rights or legal standing to contest proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, making any claims based on such agreemen....
Proceedings issued under the Urban Land Ceiling Act against a deceased declarant are null and void; possession must be established prior to claiming surplus land.
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.