APHC010685432025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3208]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 35305/2025 Between:

1. P INNAMARAJU LAKSHMI REKHA, W/O. PINNAMARAJU SATYANARAYANA RAJU, AGED 53 YEARS, RIO. D.NO. 6-22-10/6, FLAT NO. 401, NEELAKASH APARTMENTS, EAST POINT COLONY, VISAKHAPATNAM.

...PETITIONER AND

1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (STAMPS AND REGISTRATION) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2. .

2. THE COMMISSIONER AND INSPECTOR GENERAL, (REGISTRATION STAMPS), GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, GUNTUR. 3.

3. THE SUBREGISTRAR, ANANDAPURAM VISAKHAPATNAM. 4.

4. TOTTEMPUDI DEVAKINANDANA, SIO. LAKSHMI NARAYANA (LATE) AGED 47 YEARS, R/O. FLAT NO. 401, SURYA VILAS APARTMENTS, OPP. CANARA BANK, BALAJINAGAR, SIRIPURAM, VISAKHAPATNAM. 5.

5. MALISETTY KANNAMMA, W/O. LATE SUBRAHMANYAM, AGED 75 YEARS, RIO. BADDAPUDIPALEM, PENDURTHI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT

6. MALISETTY RAMANAMMA, W/O. SRINU (LATE) AGED 51 YEARS, RIO. BADDAPUDIPALEM, PENDURTHI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 7.

7. MALISETTY SATYAPRAKASH, S/O. SRINU (LATE) AGED 28 YEARS, RIO. BADDAPUDIPALEM, PENDURTHI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 8.

8. MALISETTY DEVI, D/O. SRINU LATE AGED 25 YEARS, RIO.

BADDAPUDIPALEM, PENDURTHI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 9.

9. MALISETTY KANAKAMAHALAKSHMI, W/O. LATE APPA RAO, AGED 58 YEARS, RIO. D.NO. 58-1-315, GAVARAVEEDHI, BUTCHIRAJUPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM. 10.

10. M ALISETTY SATYA KUMAR, S/O. LATE APPA RAO, AGED 41 YEARS, RIO. D.NO. 58-1-315, GAVARAVEEDHI, BUTCHIRAJUPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM. 11.

11. I RRA ANASUYA, W/O. SATYANARAYANA, AGED 39 YEARS, RIO.

D.NO. 5-17, BODDAPUDIPALEM, PENDURTHY MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toPleased to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the orders passed by the 3rd respondent in entertaining registration in violation of injunction orders dated 18.2.2009 passed in I.A.No.1516 of 2008 in O.S.No. 295 of 2008 on the file of IX Additional District Judge at Visakhapatnam is illegal and arbitrary and violation of 14 of the Constitution of India and to consequently direct the 3rd respondent not to entertain registrations in respect of land situated in an extent Ac.3.81 cents in Sy.NO.70/P, Gandigundam Village, Anandapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District covered by interim injunction orders in O.S.No. 295 of 2008 on the file of IX Additional District Judge at Visakhapatnam and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. V V SATISH Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR REVENUE

2. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS The Court made the following ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents, more particularly, respondent No.3 in entertaining the documents presented by respondent Nos.4 to 11 despite having an injunction order against respondent Nos.4 to 11 in I.A.No.1516 of 2008 in O.S.No.295 of 2008 on the file of learned IX Additional District Judge at Visakhapatnam.

2. Initially, interim orders were granted on 18.02.2009 restraining the alienation of schedule properties and the said injunction orders have been extended until further orders by 02.04.2009.

3. The case of the petitioner is that when the respondents are trying to alienate the property and create third party rights, the petitioner has made a representation to the respondents on 03.10.2020. Further again, respondents are proceeding with the alienation and submitting documents and the petitioner has filed one more representation/ objection on 29.11.2025 before the 3^rd respondent. Despite receipt of the same, the respondents have refused to entertain the objections on the ground that he is not a party to the suit.

Hence, the present writ petition.

4. Learne