SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(Online)(AP) 12

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Judge, J
Yedukondalu Verriyya T. v. Principal Secretary to Govt. Dept. of Revenue Stamps And Registration Hyderabad and Others
W. P. No. 27752 of 2009



Notification under S.22-A(2) of the Registration Act essential for prohibiting registration of documents concerning government land.

Headnote:In this case, the petitioner challenged the Sub-Registrar's refusal to register land documents citing that the land was government property under S.22-A of the Registration Act, 1908. The Court found that the lack of a proper notification under S.22-A(2) meant the prohibition could not apply. Issues included the validity of past notifications and the proper application of statutory provisions. The Court ruled in the petitioner’s favor, allowing registration of the documents.

Table of Content
1. petitioner challenges refusal of land registration. (Para 1 , 2)
2. respondents argue land is government property prohibiting registration. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court finds lack of valid notification invalidates government's stance. (Para 5 , 11 , 15)
4. s.22-a requires clear notification to prohibit registration. (Para 6 , 10 , 12)
5. court emphasizes validity of current statutes over outdated provisions. (Para 8 , 9)

1.The petitioner assails the action of the Sub-Registrar of Stamps and Assurances, Shameerpet, Ranga Reddy District, the third respondent, in not entertaining documents for registration in respect of his land in Survey No.956 of Jawahar Nagar Village and Gram Panchayat, Shameerpet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he purchased an extent of Ac.5.00 cents in Survey No.956 of Jawahar Nagar Village in the year 2007. Being desirous of selling the said land, the petitioner approached the registration authorities but was informed that registration of documents in respect of the said land was prohibited. It is his case that his land is neither Government land nor assigned land and that prohibition in respect of registration could not be applied to it. Hence, the present writ petition.

3.The Sub-Registrar, Shameerpet, the third respondent, stated in her counter that the petitioner had applied for information as to the market value of the land in Survey No.956 of Jawahar Nagar Village and that her office had informed him that the subject land was Government land and therefore no value exists in respect thereof in the basic value register. She further stated that the District Collector, Ranga Reddy, under letter dated 08.07.2008 furnished the District Registrar, Ranga Reddy, the second respondent, with a list of Government lands. As per this list, Survey No.956 was notified as Government land. Reliance was placed upon G.O.Ms.No.786, Revenue (Registration - I) Department, dated 09.11.1999, a notification issued under the old S.22 - A of the Registration Act, 1908 (for brevity, 'the Act of 1908'). According to the Sub-Registrar, Shameerpet, notwithstanding the substitution of S.22 - A of the Act of 1908 under Act No.19 of 2007, the notifications issued under the erstwhile provision would still continue to operate. She concluded by stating that the petitioner had not presented his document for registration and therefore no cause arose for filing the present writ petition.

4. The learned Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for the respondent authorities, while reiterating the above stand, contended that it was not necessary for the Government to issue a notification under S.22 - A(2) of the Act of 1908, as it presently stands. It is his case that once Government land is involved, S.22 - A(1)(b) would apply and not S.22 - A(1)(e) of the Act of 1908. He further argued that the notification issued under the erstwhile S.22 - A of the Act of 1908 vide G.O.Ms.No.786 dated 09.11.1999 would continue to operate in view of the validating clause in Act No.19 of 2007 and therefore, the prohibition put in place thereunder in respect of Survey No.956 of Shameerpet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, would continue to be operative notwithstanding the substitution of the provision. He further stated that as the petitioner had not presented his document for registration, occasion did not arise for him to file the present case and that, if the petitioner presented his document it would be considered and necessary action would be taken under S.71 of the Act of 1908.

5.This Court, however, does not find merit in the contentions advanced by the learned Government Pleader.
With regard to the objection as to the maintainability of the writ petition, the counter filed by the Sub-Registrar, Shameerpet, makes it clear that the petitioner's document, if presented for registration, is bound to be rejected. That being so, this Court is not impressed with the submission that the petitioner should be driven to


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top