Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Telangana
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

H Narayana vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh

High Court Of Telangana|22 December, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.39197 of 2014 Dated : 22.12.2014 Between:
H. Narayana S/o.Late Hanumanthaiah, Aged : 54 yrs, Retired Employee, R/o.Door No.27-S7-305, Marrimanu Street Near SBI Main Branch, Tirupati, Chittor District.
.. Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Registration) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 4 others .. Respondents This Court made the following :
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.39197 of 2014 ORDER :
The petitioner claims to be the owner of land to an extent of Ac.4.27 cents in Survey No.169/1, Chennaiahgunta Village, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Chittoor District. The petitioner traces the history of flowing of title. According to the petitioner on 21.09.1883, the Governor-in-Council of Madras on behalf of the Secretary of State for India, granted title deed in favour of one Sri Velala Venkata Narasimha Panthulu, to an extent of Ac.24.95 cents dry land and Ac.25.92 cents of wet land in Chennaiahgunta Village. Some portion of it was alienated on 07.12.1955 in favour of one Gangaiah. The father of the petitioner purchased Ac.4.27 cents in Survey No.169/1 from Gangaiah on 09.06.1957. Ever since the family of the petitioner was in possession and enjoyment. According to the petitioner in 10 (1) Adangal (Village Settlement Register) the name of the father of the petitioner is shown, and pattedar pass books and title deeds are issued in his favour.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the petitioner intended to alienate the said property and approached the Sub- Registrar, Renigunta, Chittoor District (3rd respondent) for furnishing the information. The 3rd respondent orally informed the petitioner that the property is shown as Government property and therefore, no alienation can be permitted. However, there is no proof of petitioner approaching the Sub-Registrar or presenting the deed of conveyance brought on record.
3. Having regard to the same, liberty is granted to the petitioner to submit an application in writing eliciting information or submitting deed of conveyance transferring the property in favour of third parties before the 3rd respondent. The petitioner is also permitted to enclose all relevant documents in support of his claim. As and when such a request is made or document is presented, the 3rd respondent shall consider the same along with relevant documents filed in support of his claim, in accordance with the provisions of Indian Registration Act 1908 and Indian Stamp Act, 1899 and communicate his decision by a reasoned order with reference to the information sought or with reference to the status of the property. If the document is otherwise in order, the 3rd respondent shall register and release. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of three weeks from the date of submission of application. If the request of the petitioner is not acceded to, the petitioner is entitled to work out his remedies.
4. With the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
P.NAVEEN RAO,J 22nd December, 2014 Rds
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

H Narayana vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Court

High Court Of Telangana

JudgmentDate
22 December, 2014
Judges
  • P Naveen Rao