ORDER:

The petitioner seeks writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not registering the documents in respect of land admeasuring Acres 3.50 cents in Survey No.230/1 of Ananthaiahgaripally Village, Pullampet Mandal, Kadapa District, as illegal, arbitrary and for a consequential direction to the 3rd respondent to register the documents.

2. The petitioner’s case is thus:

(a) Acres 3.50 cents of land in Survey No.230/1 of Ananthaiahgaripally Village, Pullampet Mandal, Kadapa District, was assigned in favour of Smt.Mallela Saraswathamma and Sri Mallela Subbarayadu. The assignees obtained loan from Primary Agriculture Co-operative Society, Ananthaiahgaripalli, Pullampet by mortgaging the assigned lands and when they failed to repay the loan, the Society initiated proceedings under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 and brought the mortgaged lands for sale in execution of Awards No.49/2010-11 and 50/2010-11, dated 01.12.2010 and in the public auction, one Padasala Ramaiah purchased the said land and obtained sale certificate dated 29.06.2012. (b) When Padasala Ramaiah tried to alienate the aforesaid land, the 3rd respondent raised objection on the ground that the land was an assigned land, aggrieved, he filed W.P.No.22463 of 2012 before the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh and relying upon the judgment in the case of Sub-Registrar, Srikalahasti, Chittoor District and Anr. V. K.Guravaiah and Anr1, wherein the division bench of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh held that if assigned lands were purchased by the third party in execution of award by the Cooperative Central Bank, they lose the character of assigned land and the Sub-Registrar cannot refuse to register the documents, the said writ petition was allowed and 3rd respondent was directed to receive and process the documents. Accordingly, by virtue of the judgment in W.P.No.22463 of 2012, Padasala Ramaiah gifted the aforesaid land in favour of his sister Mallela Aruna, who is the vendor of the present petitioner.

(c) The further case of the petitioner is that when Mallela Aruna for her personal needs proposed to alienate the said land to the petitioner, the 3rd respondent again refused to receive and register documents on the same old ground that those lands are assigned lands. Hence, the writ petition.

3. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration for the respondents.

4. A perusal of the material papers shows that Padasala Ramaiah obtained sale certificates from the Officer on Special Duty, District Co-operative Central Bank, Kadapa, in respect of Acres 3.50 cents of land in Survey No.230/1, which was originally assigned to Smt.Mallela Saraswathamma and Sri Mallela Subbrayadu.

1 2009 (2) ALD 250 (DB)

5. Then, the judgment in W.P.No.22463 of 2012 would show that when the alienation sought to be made by Padasala Ramaiah was objected by the Sub-Registrar on the ground that it was an assigned land, the said Ramaiah filed the writ petition, therein following the judgment of the Division Bench of A.P. High Court in K.Guravaiah’s case (supra 1), a learned single judge has allowed the writ petition and directed the registering authority to receive and process the document for registration without reference to the ground that the subject lands were originally assigned. Then, a gift settlement deed dated 04.08.2012 shows that Padasala Ramaiah executed gift settlement deed in respect of land in an extent of Acres 3.50 cents in Survey No.230/1 in favour of his sister Mallela Aruna. Now, it appears, the said Aruna proposes to alienate the same land in favour of the petitioner. Law in this regard is no more res integra.

6. In K.Guravaiah’s case (supra 1), a division bench of High Court of A.P. has made it clear that mortgage created in favour of a bank by the original assignee of the land is just proper and legal and the assignee of the land can raise money by mortgaging the lan