THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.19016 OF 2024

ORDER:

1. This writ petition is filed questioning the Endorsement order passed by the respondent No.4 in Rc.No.B/256/2024 dated 23.05.2024, whereby the document presented by the petitioner for registration in respect of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.1.10 guntas in Sy.No.811/E, situated at Nallabelli Village, Wardannapet Mandal, Warangal District was refused on the ground that a Civil Suit vide O.S.No.27/2024 is pending on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing for the official respondents and the learned Counsel for the respondent No.5.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the owner and possessor land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.1.10 guntas in Sy.No.811/E, situated at Nallabelly Village, Wardannapet Mandal of Warangal District (hereinafter referred to as ‘subject land’), having acquired from her grandfather in the year, 2016 by way of gift and her name was also mutated in the revenue records and Pattadar pass book was also issued to her vide Pass Book No.T22150030635 A/c No.1049. In order to meet the family necessities, the petitioner entered into an agreement with a prospective purchaser and a slot was also booked for registration duly paying registration charges of Rs.30,888/- and presented the document on 14.05.2024 for registration, but the respondent No.4 vide impugned Endorsement dated 23.05.2024 refused to register the same on the ground that one Gugulothu Vijaya, respondent No.5, has filed objection petition before the respondent No.3 requesting not to effect any registration in respect of the lands in Sy.No.811/E, 674/A, 675 and 640/E as a Civil suit is pending before the II Additonal Junior Civil Judge, Warangal.

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner submitted a detailed explanation to the impugned Memo. The subject property is not covered under Section 22-A of the Act since the subject property is purely patta land and it is not kept under prohibited list nor any orders from the Courts restraining the respondent authorities from registration of the subject land.

5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the Registration authority is not empowered to refuse to register a document when presented for registration, except in the case, property sought to be registered under the document is covered by any of the properties in Section 22-A of the Registration Act and in the event, the Registration authorities refused to register the a document, he has to pass an order under Section 71 of the Act by recording the reasons and requested to allow the writ petition by directing the respondent-authorities to receive, register and release the document sought to be presented by the petitioner. Further the registering authority is prohibited from registering documents only when there is order of injunction from a competent civil Court, but the registering authority cannot stop registration of the document.

6. The learned Counsel for the petitioner in support of his contention placed reliance on the following Judgment:

Thirumala Venkata Reddaiah Chowdary and another Vs. Potla Krishna Prasad and others

7. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration and the learned Counsel for the respondent No.5 would fairly conceded that the subject property is not covered under Secton 22-A of the

1 AIR 2009 AP 166.

Registration Act, nor there is any order from the Civil Court restraining the registration of the subject property and requested to pass appropriate orders.

8. After hearing both sides and on perusing the document, admittedly the property sought to be registered is not covered by under Secton 22-A of the Registration Act. Further there is no order from the competent Civil Court prohibiting registration