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

Kasireddy Prasanna Kumar Reddy vs The State Of A P

High Court Of Telangana|18 November, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN Present HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.34836 of 2014 Between:
Kasireddy Prasanna Kumar Reddy, S/o. Kasireddy Yoganjul Reddy, Aged about 26 years, Occ: Un-employee, Cheruvukampalle Village, Chakrayapet Mandal, Y.S.R. District.
.. Petitioner AND The State of A.P., Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 4 others .. Respondents The Court made the following:
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.34836 of 2014 ORDER:
The petitioner claims that he purchased land to an extent of Ac. 3.19 cents in Survey No.205/1 of Cherlopalli Village, Chinthakommadinne Mandal, Y.S.R. District, from one Sri K. Nadipi Subbanna, S/o. K. Pedda Subbanna, through Sale Deed, dated 25.10.2014, and presented the same for registration on 27.10.2014 before the Sub-Registrar (Rural), Kadapa, Y.S.R. District (5th respondent) and the Sub-Registrar assigned the document P.No.173/2014, but he has not registered and released the document so far and no reasons are assigned. The petitioner claims that the subject land was purchased by one Syed Khaja Mohiddin, vide registered Sale Deed, dated 06.01.1987. From him, the vendor of the petitioner purchased the subject land on 30.04.1992. The petitioner submits that the vendor of the petitioner and his vendors have been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the subject land. Revenue authorities have issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds. The property is not classified as an ‘assigned land’ nor there is any prohibition on the said property imposed in exercise of statutory mandate. Therefore, the action of the Sub-Registrar in not registering and releasing the document is illegal.
2. As of now, no reasons are assigned as to why the document is not released. Therefore, the petitioner is permitted to place all the relevant documents before the Sub-Registrar (Rural), Kadapa, Y.S.R. District (5th respondent). Considering the same, the Sub-Registrar shall process the Sale Deed and pass appropriate orders. If the Sub-Registrar is convinced of the status of the claim of the petitioner and that there is no prohibition imposed against registration, he shall register and release the document. If the Sub-Registrar has any objection on registration, he shall duly assign the reasons and communicate the reasons to the petitioner. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of three (3) weeks. It is always open to the petitioner to work out his remedies, if he is aggrieved by any such decision.
3. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
P.NAVEEN RAO, J Date: 18th November, 2014 KL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.34836 of 2014 Date: 18th November, 2014 KL
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

Kasireddy Prasanna Kumar Reddy vs The State Of A P

Court

High Court Of Telangana

JudgmentDate
18 November, 2014
Judges
  • P Naveen Rao