High Court for State of TelanganaWP/22897/2015disposed of no costs

Kattepogu Prabhudas v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

2015-07-30Vilas V.Afzulpurkar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH **** WRIT PETITION NO.22897 OF 2015 Between:

Kattepogu Prabhudas.

...PETITIONER AND

1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Stamps & Registration Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, and four others.

...RESPONDENTS SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments? Yes/No

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law Reporters/Journals? Yes/No

3. Whether Their Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment? Yes/No THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO.22897 OF 2015 ORDER:

The petitioner's grievance is that the fifth respondent is not

receiving and processing the document proposed, executed by the petitioner, with regard to Ac.1.00 of land covered by D.No.556/2 situated at Kuragallu Village and Grampanchayatyh, Mangalagiri Mandal, Guntur District.

Learned Government Pleader received instructions from the fourth respondent which state that as per the revenue records, the aforementioned property falling under Survey No.13-B is classified as "Government poramboke land".

However, the petitioner is yet to present the document before the fifth respondent and it is for the fifth respondent to consider the registerability or otherwise of the said document and even before presentation, the fifth respondent cannot decline to register the document on any ground.

The petitioner is, therefore, permitted to present the document before the fifth respondent in accordance with the Stamp Act and the Registration Act and if, for any reason, he is not satisfied with the compliance, he is at liberty to pass appropriate orders under Section 71 of the Registration Act and communicate the same to the petitioner. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

_______________________ (VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J) 30th July 2015 RRB