APHC010383192012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Bench Sr.No:-6 [3552]

AT AMARAVATI WRIT APPEAL NO: 1459 of 2012 Sri Byragi Mutt, ...Appellant Vs.

K. Chandra Sekhar and Others ...Respondent(s)

**********

Advocate for Appellant: Mr. V. Venugopal Rao, Senior Counsel, appearing vice Mrs.Devi Subhashini Anne, Standing Counsel for Endowments Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): Mr. Sudhakar Ambati, Govt. Pleader for Endowments CORAM : T HE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN DATE : 10^th December 2025 Per DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ (oral):

The present writ appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order, dated 31.07.2012, passed in W.P. No.29963 of 2011.

Briefly stated, the material facts are as under:

The petitioners had preferred the writ petition supra being aggrieved of the communication, dated 26.12.2008, addressed to the Sub-Registrar, Ongole in Prakasam District with a request not to register the properties relating to the charitable Hindu religious institutions under Section 22(A)(1)(c)

of the Registration (A.P. Amendments) Act, 2007, as the lands in question were required for maintenance of the charitable and religious institutions.

2. Section 22A prescribes the prohibition from registration of documents relating to properties owned by Religious and Charitable Endowments falling under the purview of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, or by Wakfs falling under the Wakfs Act, 1995, executed by persons other than those statutorily empowered to do so.

3. The basis for such a challenge was that the petitioners proposed to purchase an extent of land admeasuring 15 cents situate in Sy. No.43 out of a total extent of Ac.17.69 cents. It was the said document, which was required to be registered in accordance with the provisions of the Registration Act. The petitioners claimed that since the property in question was not incorporated in the register maintained in terms of Section 43 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, such a communication addressed to the registering authority was unsustainable.

4. The case of the petitioners was that one Beeru Venkata Govinda Misra S/o Janaddhin Misra had been granted a Ryotwari Patta on 15.06.1989 in Form-VIII in accordance with the provisions of the Andhra Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956, over land admeasuring Ac.17.69 cents situate in Sy. No.43. The said Beeru Venkata Govinda Misra, who expired on 23.03.1991, it is stated, had executed a Will on 12.12.1989, as per which, Hanuamanghadi Venkata Pavan Kumar S/o Venkata Lakshmi Shanmukeswara Prasad succeeded to the extent of the aforementioned Ac.17.69 cents along with other properties. The name of Hanuamanghadi Venkata Pavan Kumar, it is stated, was also entered in Revenue records as the owner of the land in question.

The title, it was claimed, having vested in the aforementioned Hanuamanghadi Venkata Pavan Kumar, there was no hindrance in the registering authorities registering the document, which was to be executed between the petitioners and Hanuamanghadi Venkata Pavan Kumar.

5. It can be seen that the appellant was not a party respondent before the learned single Judge. The learned single Judge proceeded to allow the writ petition and issued directions to the registering authority to register the document presented before it by the petitioners keeping in view of the decision rendered in P. Suresh v. A.P. State, 2009 ALT 3 419 and Madiga Papamma v.

State of Andhra Pradesh and others, 2011 (2) ALD 487 The basis for the said direction lay in the finding recorded that the Commissioner ought to have taken care to verify as to whether the land belonged to „Ongole Bairaghi Matham‟ or not and further that there was no

basis for the Commissioner to have notified this land as Endowment property. It was also held that entries made in the Revenue record reflecting the property as being held by the Bairaghi