Nalla Anjaiah v. The State Of Telangana,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * * WRIT PETITION No.2958 of 2016 BETWEEN Nalla Anjaiah.

... PETITIONER AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Stamps & Registration) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. ...RESPONDENTS DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 05.02.2016 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR 1.

Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments?

No 2.

Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

No 3.

Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment?

No

ORDER:

Nobody appears for the fourth respondent.

2. Relying upon the letter of the Executive Officer, Wakf, Karimnagar dated 13.10.2015, petitioner states that only an extent of Ac.1.12 guntas in Sy.No.846 is notified in the Gazette notification as grave yard and the balance extent of Ac.0.38 guntas is petitioner's patta land. Complaining that the third respondent is not entertaining the sale presented by the petitioner with respect to Ac.0.12 guntas out of Ac.0.38 guntas, referred to above, the present writ petition is filed.

3. Since the third respondent cannot return the document presented as sale deed and has to deal with in accordance with the Registration Act, the third respondent is directed to receive and process the sale deed presented by the petitioner in accordance with the Registration Act, 1908 and Indian Stamp Act, 1899 and if the document is in conformity with the provisions of the aforesaid enactments, thereafter, register and release the document in accordance with the due procedure. It is also made clear that in the event of registering authority not being satisfied with the compliance under the Registration Act or the Stamp Act, appropriate refusal endorsement together with reasons shall be recorded and communicated to the petitioner in terms of Section 71 of the Registration Act. The writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J

February 5, 2016/DSK