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

Ramachandra Sastry vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh

High Court Of Telangana|08 October, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN Present HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.29812 of 2014 Between:
Ramachandra Sastry, S/o. Late Narappa, Aged about 70 years, Occ: Agricultural, R/o. Yegnisettipalli Village, Chilamatturu Mandal, Anantapuram, Anantapuram District.
.. Petitioner AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 4 others .. Respondents The Court made the following:
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.29812 of 2014 ORDER:
The claim of the petitioner is that Yegnisettipalli is declared as Shotrimdar Village and the petitioner is the legal heir of original Shotrimdar. The petitioner is put in possession and enjoyment of the same. When the petitioner intend to dispose of the property in his possession and enjoyment and approached the Sub-Registrar, Chilamatturu, Anantapuram District (5th respondent), the 5th respondent insisted for production of No Objection Certificate from revenue authorities. Hence, this writ petition.
2. When the matter is taken up for consideration, learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue submits that the subject matter to the extent of No Objection Certificate is squarely covered by the decision of Division Bench in W.A.No.1653 of 2013. With the consent of both the learned counsel, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. Learned counsel for petitioner also submits that the land in issue is not assigned.
3. Considering the submissions of both the learned counsel, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Sub-Registrar, Chilamatturu, Anantapuram District (5th respondent) to receive and process the document presented by the petitioner without insisting upon such NOC and in the event the document presented fulfils the requirements of the Registration Act, 1908, and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, he shall register and release the document in accordance with the due procedure. However, if the 5th respondent is of the opinion that the document presented for registration warrants denial, he shall pass orders in writing indicating the reasons for such refusal and communicate the same to the petitioner in accordance with Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908. 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: 8th October, 2014 KL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.29812 of 2014 Date: 8th October, 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

Ramachandra Sastry vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh

Court

High Court Of Telangana

JudgmentDate
08 October, 2014
Judges
  • P Naveen Rao