Telangana High Court
Golusula Mongamma vs Bakshi Kiran Kumar on 15 December, 2022
Bench: Ujjal Bhuyan, C.V. Bhaskar Reddy
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
W.A.No.802 of 2022
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. Praveen Sagar, learned counsel for the appellant
and Mr. A.K.Narasimha Rao, learned counsel for respondent
No.1/writ petitioner.
2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 28.09.2022
passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of W.P.No.37476 of
2022 filed by respondent No.1 as the writ petitioner.
3. Respondent No.1 as the writ petitioner had filed the related
writ petition seeking a direction to respondent No.2 to entertain his
representation for recording his name as the owner of the subject
property being land admeasuring Acs.4.11 guntas situated at Survey
Nos.207/E, 207/E/5 and 220/E/1 of Dattappagudem Village,
Mothkur Mandal, Yadadri-Bhuvanagiri District (briefly 'the subject
land' hereinafter).
::2::
4. Before the learned Single Judge, respondent No.1 contended
that he had purchased the subject land by way of a registered sale
deed dated 23.07.2017. However, after introduction of Dharani
Portal and upgradation of land records, his name was not entered
into the records. In this connection, he had submitted
representation dated 26.07.2022 before the District Collector,
Yadadri-Bhuvanagiri District (respondent No.3), but the same was
not considered.
5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue
submitted before the learned Single Judge that the representation
could not be uploaded because of certain technical reasons and
therefore, sought indulgence of the Court to enable the
respondents to consider the representation manually.
6. Learned Single Judge noted that respondent No.6 also has a
claim to the subject land. Therefore, learned Single Judge while
directing respondent No.2 to consider the representation of
respondent No.1, also directed respondent No.2 to put respondent
No.6 on notice and to hear her before passing an appropriate
::3::
order. Relevant portion of the order of the learned Single Judge
dated 28.09.2022 reads as under:
Taking into consideration the submissions made
on either side, especially the difficulty expressed by
the learned counsel for the petitioner in submitting an
online application, the Writ Petition is disposed of
directing respondent No.2 to consider the
representation dated 26.07.2022, acknowledged by
the office of respondent No.2 on the same date for
updating the name of the petitioner in respect of land
admeasuring Acs.4.11 gts situated in Survey
Nos.207/E, 207/E/5 and 220/E/1 of Dattapagudem
Village, Mothkur Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri
District and pass appropriate orders thereon in
accordance with law within a period of eight (8)
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order.
It is further directed that respondent No.2 while
considering the representations submitted by the
petitioner shall put respondent No.5 on notice and
afford her a reasonable opportunity and then pass
orders as directed above. There shall be no order as
to costs.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant had
entered into an agreement of sale with respondent No.1/writ
::4::
petitioner and had made substantial payment to respondent No.1.
However, respondent No.1 has backtracked on the issue for which
a cheating case has also been registered against him.
8. On due consideration, we are of the view that if the appellant
is aggrieved by the action of respondent No.1, it is open to him to
avail his legal remedy but, that cannot be a ground for interfering
with the order of the learned Single Judge which we find to be just
and proper.
9. Subject to the above, writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, stand
dismissed.
__________________
UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ
_______________________
C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J
Date: 15.12.2022
LUR
