Pallam Reddy Venkata Ramana vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2862 AP

            HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

MAIN CASE NO: WRIT PETITION NO.15859 OF 2021

                    PROCEEDING SHEET

SL.     DATE                           ORDER                                            OFFICE
NO.                                                                                      NOTE
                                                                                    `
      04.08.2021   MSM,J
                               W.P.No. 15859 OF 2021

                          Rule Nisi. Call for records.
                          Notice returnable in four weeks.



                                                                           MSM, J
                                        I.A.No.1 of 2021

                           This application is filed seeking direction
                   against Respondent No.4 to receive and register the

sale deed presented by the petitioner in respect of Plot No.36 in Survey No.242 of Ward No.13, Tiruchanuru Village, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tiruchanuru Group, Chittoor District, admeasuring an extent of 156.66 square yards without reference to the proceedings of 2nd respondent in Lr.in Rc.No.M1/ 9580/2016 dated 05.07.2016 pending disposal of the writ petition.

Basing on the judgment of the Apex Court in Siri Nivasam Mutual Aided House Building Society Ltd and others vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others (Special Leave Petition (C) NO. 15009 OF 2016 dated 19.04.2018), the Apex Court held as follows:

"It is ordered that the registration already permitted by this Court shall be treated as a provisional registration subject to the result of the writ petitions now pending before the High Court. We make it clear that merely because a provisional registration has been permitted, the parties shall not claim any additional equity. We further make it clear that without express permission from the High Court, there shall be no further transfer. In order to avoid further difficulty to the similarly situated people, we

SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE NO. NOTE

make it clear that it will be open to them to approach the High Court and seek appropriate and similar interim orders regarding transfers during the pendency of the writ petitions."

Taking advantage of the last sentence of the direction issued by the Apex Court, Sri Nagam Chandra Shekar Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, requests to issue a similar direction.

A direction issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is binding on the Court and also officials in the State. The Hon'ble Supreme Court directed that, similarly situated persons can approach this Court and obtain a similar order. Therefore, in view of the direction issued by the Apex Court, the petitioner approached this Court to seek same relief.

Hence, Respondent No.4 is directed to receive and register the document provisionally, submitted by the petitioner and release the same. Such registration shall be treated as provisional registration, subject to result of the present writ petition. As provisional registration is permitted by this Court, the parties shall not claim additional equity, while making it clear that without express permission from the High Court, there shall not be no further transfer.

Accordingly, an interim direction is issued as claimed by the petitioner.

Post after four weeks for filing counter affidavit.

MSM, J tm