IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
C.V. BHASKAR REDDY, J
Javvaji Naveen Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana - Respondent
Writ Petition No.10158 Of 2024
Decided On : 19-04-2024
ORDER :
C.V. BHASKAR REDDY, J.
This writ petition is filed challenging the action of the Registering Authorities in refusing to register the subject documents presented by the petitioner, based on the Gazette Notification R.R.No.83, dated 25.09.2013, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. It is stated that the petitioner is the owner and possessor of house bearing No.06-653/363 (PTIN No.1250113990), admeasuring 90.0 square yards in Sy.No.107 situated at NTR Nagar, Suraram Colony, Suraram Village, Quthbullapur Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District. The case of the petitioner is that when he intended to dispossess the said property in favour of third party, respondent No.3 refused to receive the sale deed for registration on the ground that the petitioner’s property is under prohibitory list as per Section 22A of the registration Act basing on the following information:
(a) The property is government land notified as prohibited under Section 22A of the Act as per Ranga Reddy District Collector Gazette notification R.R.No.83, Communicated by the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy vide File No.E5/4730/2013/Qutubullapur/Nizampet, dated 25.09.2013.
(b) Deputy Collector and Tahsildar, Qutubullapur (M) File No.B/583/2012, dated 17.02.2012.
(c) Gazette Notification No.134, dated 10.03.2005 and G.O.Ms.No.863, Revenue (Registrations-I), 09.0.2005 communicated by Commissioner and Inspector General (R&S) Hyderabad vide File No.G1/4661/2005, dated 02.07.2005.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the subject matter of this writ petition is squarely covered by the order, dated 10.04.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.No.9280 of 2024 and also the common order, dated 22.03.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.9645 of 2021 and 26353 of 2023.
5. The above submission is not disputed by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing for the respondents.
6. Having regard to the above, it is relevant to refer para Nos.23 to 32 of the common order, dated 22.03.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.9645 of 2021 and 26353 of 2023, which reads as under:
“23. From a perusal of the Notification in R.R. No.83, dated 25.09.2013, the subject lands were notified under Section 22-A (1)(a) for the purpose of Section 22-A(1). It is only a notice given inviting objections and suggestions on the above proposal from all persons who are likely to be affected thereby for being taken into consideration by the Government. The details of the properties mentioned in the annexure states that the subject lands are Government lands.
24. Section 22-A (1) (e) of the Act manifests that any documents or class of documents pertaining to the properties, the State Government may, by notification prohibit the registration in which avowed or accrued interests of Central and State Governments, Local Bodies, Educational, Cultural, Religious and Charitable Institutions, those attached by Civil, Criminal, Revenue Courts and Direct and Indirect Tax Laws and others which are likely to adversely affect these interest.
Section 22-A (2) reads as under:
“(2) For the purpose of Clause (e) of sub-section (1), the State Government shall publish a notification after obtaining reasons for and full description of properties furnished by the District Collectors concerned in the manner as may be prescribed.”
25. It is pertinent to note that in the case of Vinjamuri Rajagopala Chary (Supra) paras 156 had summarized and issued directions. As per the Clause (v) no notification is contemplated under sub-section (2) of Section 22-A with respect to the properties falling under clauses (a) to (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 22-A. As per Clause (vi), the properties covered under clause (e) of Section 22-A shall be notified in the official Gazette of the State Governments and shall be forwarded, along with the list of properties, and a copy of the relevant notification/Gazette, to the concerned registering authorities under the
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,....
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 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 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.
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.