Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
N.V. Shravan Kumar, J.
Sri Chinnaramaiahgari Shiva Rajulu S/o.Ch.Agamaiah - Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana, Rep.By Its Principal Secretary (Revenue) Secretariat, Hyderabad & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 9645 of 2021 and 26353 of 2023
Decided On : 22-03-2024
REFUSAL OF REGISTRATION - PROPERTY DISPUTE - REGISTRATION ACT, 1908 - SECTION 22-A - SUMMARY
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought registration of sale deeds for their properties, which were refused by the Sub-Registrar based on prohibitory lists under Section 22-A of the Registration Act. The petitioners challenged the refusal in the writ petitions.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the authorities had included the properties in the prohibitory list without following due process of law. The Court also noted that the notifications issued were defective and not in accordance with the provisions of Section 22-A of the Registration Act. The Court held that the refusal for registration based on these notifications was illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of Articles 14, 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the notifications issued for including the properties in the prohibitory list were defective and not in accordance with the law. The Court also emphasized that mere registration of the document does not confer title on the subject property.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the writ petitions, set aside the notifications, and directed the Registering Authorities to make necessary changes in the records. The Court also recalled the condition imposed on the petitioners not to resort to further conveyance of the subject property.
COMMON ORDER
N.V. Shravan Kumar, J. - Since the issues involved in these writ petitions are common for consideration they are being disposed of by this common order.
2. W.P. No.9645 of 2021 has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the 3rd respondent i.e., Sub Registrar, Qutbullapur, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, in refusing to receive and register the sale deed presented by the petitioners in respect of property House bearing No.03-022, and Plot bearing No.03-022/NR, with a plinth area of 435 sq.fts., Commercial and 400 sq.fts., Residential in Ground Floor and 835 sq.fts., on first floor, thus totally 435 sq.fts., Commercial in Ground Floor and 1235 sq.fts., residential in Ground and first floors, on Plot No.1034, and land admeasuring 142 sq.yds., covered under Block No.3 and Ward No.1, in Sy.No.107, situated at Weaker Section Housing Colony, Suraram Colony of Suraram village, Quthbullapur Mandal, and Municipality, under GHMC, Medchal-Malkajgiri district (herein after referred to as 'the subject property') basing on prohibitory list under Section 22-A of Registration Act as per the 1. Ranga Reddy District Gazette Notification R.R.No.83, communicated by Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy vide File No.E5/4730/2013/Quthbullapur/ Nizampet dated 25.09.2013, 2. Deputy Collector & Tahsildar Quthbullapur Mandal, File No.B/583/2012, dated 17.02.2012 and 3. Gazette Notification No.134, dated 10.03.2005 and G.O.Ms.No.292, Revenue (Registration.I), 9th March 2005 communicated by Commissioner and Inspector General (R&S), Hyderabad vide File No.G1/4661/2005, dated 02.07.2005, is illegal, arbitrary, in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and also in violation of Registration Act, 1908 besides in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent No.3 herein to receive and register the sale deed presented by the petitioners, in respect of the House bearing No.03.022, and plot bearing No.03-022/NR, with a plinth area of 435 sq.fts., commercial and 400 sq.fts., residential in ground floor and 835 sq.fts., in first floor, thus totally 435 sq.fts., commercial in ground floor and 1235 sq.fts., residential in ground and first floors on plot No.1034 and land admeasuring 142 sq.yds., covered under Block No.3 and Ward No.107, situated at Weaker Section Housing Colony, Suraram Colony of Suraram Village, Quthbullapur Mandal and Municipality, under GHMC, Medchal-Malkajgiri district.
3. W.P. No.26353 of 2023 has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus questioning the action of the respondent No.3, Sub-Registrar, Quthbullapur, Medchal-Malkajgiri in not receiving and registering the sale deed presented by the petitioner in respect of all that the House No.28-169/4/2/1 (PTIN No.1151601839), with plinth area of 450 Sft., of RCC in ground floor and 450 Sft., of RCC in first floor, thus the total plinth are is 900 Sft., (G+1) of RCC admeasuring 100 square yards or 83.67 sq.meters (covered under Block No.28) in Survey No.151, situated at Maruthi Nagar of Quthbullapur village and Mandal, under GHMC Quthbullapur Circle, Medcal-Malkajgiri district, Telangana State (hereinafter referred to as 'the subject property') on the basis of prohibitory list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 as per the 1. Ranga Reddy District Gazette Notification R.R. No.83, communicated by Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy vide File No.E5/4730/2013/Quthbullapur/Quthbullapur dated 25.09.2013, 2. Deputy Collector & Tahsildar Quthbullapur Mandal, File No.B/583/2012, dated 17.02.2012 and 3. Gazette Notification No.134, dated 10.03.2005 and G.O.Ms.No.292, Revenue (Registration.I), 9th March 2005 communicated by Commissioner and Inspector General (Revenue & Stamps), Hyderabad vide File No.G1/4661/2005, dated 02.07.2005, as illegal, arbitrary, in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and also in violation of Registration Act, 1908 besides in violation of principles of natural justice and con
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the refusal for registration of properties based on defective notifications under Section 22-A of the Registration Act was illegal, arbitrary,....
The court established that proper notifications and adherence to guidelines are essential for enforcing prohibitions on property registration under Section 22(A) of the Registration Act.
The court ruled that land cannot be classified as prohibited under Section 22-A without proper Gazette notification, allowing registration of sale deeds.
The Sub-Registrar must register documents presented for registration unless legally prohibited, following the Registration Act's provisions.
The court ruled that a notification inviting objections does not constitute a valid basis for refusing property registration under the Registration Act, emphasizing compliance with statutory provisio....
The court ruled that a notification inviting objections cannot serve as a basis for denying registration of documents under the Registration Act, 1908.
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
