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
| 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 court emphasizes validity of current statutes over outdated provisions.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
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.