Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
Kotagadda Chandrakala – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
ORDER :
N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR, J.
This writ petition has been filed challenging the action of the Registering Authorities in refusing to register the subject documents based on the Gazette Notification R.R. No.83, dated 25.09.2013.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the subject matter of this writ petition is squarely covered by the common order dated 22.03.2024 passed in W.P. Nos.9645 of 2021 and W.P. No.26353 of 2023 by this Court. The learned counsel would further submit that this Court, while granting interim order dated 28.04.2021 in W.P. No.9645 of 2021 had stipulated a condition not to resort to further conveyance of the subject property without leave of this Court and similarly in W.P. No.26353 of 2023 this Court, while granting interim order dated 22.09.2023, had prohibited the parties from proceeding with further conveyance of the property except on obtaining required permission from this Court.
3. It is further submitted that in the present writ petition this Court, while granting interim order dated 20.04.2020, had directed the Registering authorities to register the subject documents. Subsequently, in pursuance of said interim order, the Registering a
The court ruled that a notification inviting objections does not constitute a valid basis for denying registration of documents under the Registration Act, 1908.
The court ruled that a notification inviting objections does not constitute a valid basis for refusing registration of documents under the Registration Act.
The court ruled that a notification inviting objections cannot serve as a basis for denying registration of documents under the Registration Act, 1908.
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 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,....
Notification under S.22-A(2) of the Registration Act essential for prohibiting registration of documents concerning government land.
The Sub-Registrar must register documents presented for registration unless legally prohibited, following the Registration Act's provisions.
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.
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
