Telangana High Court
Mansoor Sadruddin vs The State Of Telangana on 12 November, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.31589 of 2024
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.H.Rakesh Kumar,
learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing
for the respondents. With their consent, this writ petition is taken up for
disposal at the stage of admission itself.
2. This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:
"to pass an order direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of
writ of mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents more
particularly Respondent No.3 while refusing to receive and register the
Sale Deed Dated 23.10.2024 presented by the Petitioners in respect of
Residential Flat No.402, on Fourth Floor (PTIN No.1181004893) bearing
GHMC No.10332/9/15/18 in the building known as Padmavathi Enclave
admeasuring 800 sft together with 5.09%undivided share of land
admeasuring 35 63 sq yds constructed on Plot Nos.4 and 15 Sy No.74/12
situated at East Marredpally Secunderabad on the basis of LGC
No.167/1997 as illegal arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural
justice and contrary to the provisions of Registration Act and consequently
direct the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 to receive and register the Sale Deed
Dated 23.10.2024 presented by the Petitioners pertaining to the above
property thereby to release the same in accordance with law."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.1 is the
absolute owner and possessor of the subject property and now intends to sell
the subject property in favour of petitioner No.2 and accordingly petitioners
Registering Authority to register the sale deed along, but the Registering
Authority are refusing to receive and process the subject property without
assigning any reasons. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that many writ petitions
were filed seeking registration of the documents in respect of the lands in
Sy.No.74 at East Marredpally, Secunderabad, and this Court had directed the
registering authority to receive, register and release the documents presented
in respect of the land in Sy.No.74 at East Marredpally, Secunderabad and
sought to pass similar order.
5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration
while acceding to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
petitioners would submit that many number of writ petitions have been filed
on similar issue wherein no separate counter affidavits have been filed
however, in one of the writ petition i.e., in W.P. No.11653 of 2013, which was
disposed of on 23.07.2024 by this Court, a counter affidavit has been filed and
the averments mentioned therein may be read/adopted as a counter
averments in the present writ petition and has drawn the attention of this
Court to the relevant paragraph of the counter affidavit filed in W.P. No.11653
of 2013, which reads as under:
"It is submitted that a comprehensive land case was filed by the
then Mandal Revenue Officer, Marredpally against the (7)
Societies and as well as some of individual plot owners of Sy.No.74
of Marredpally (Paigah) village in L.G.C, No.167/97 in the
Spl.Court under L.G(P) Act, 1982. The Hon'ble Spl.Court, under
A.P.L.G.(P) Act dismissed the LGC No.167/97 on 18-03-2010.
Aggrieved by the same, the then MRO, Marredpally Mandal filed
WP No.19106/2010, before the Hon'ble High Court and the same
is pending. The Hon'ble Spl.Court dismissed the LGC on
erroneous grounds without properly appreciating the evidence of
Govt. and as such writ petition has been filed challenging the
same. Thus the LGC judgment has not become final. Further
submitted that the litigation between the parties and the Govt. has
not reached to its logical end. Under such circumstances it can't be
said that Govt. have lost its claim. As such the interest of Govt.
still subsists. In view of the above the interest of Govt. that subsists
in the subject land will be jeopardized if this W.P. is allowed.
Hence it is liable for dismissal."
6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that subject
matter was earlier adjudicated by the Spl.Court under A.P.L.G.(P) Act, 1982,
vide LGC No.167 of 1997, however the said LGC No.167 of 1997 has been
dismissed on 18.03.2010. Aggrieved by the same, the Mandal Revenue Officer,
Marredpally Mandal, filed WP No.19106 of 2010 before this Court and the
same has been heard and reserved by the Hon'ble Division Bench.
7. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submit that since in
similar writ petitions this Court by way of interim order had directed the
registering authorities to receive, register the documents presented before
them, without reference to the claim of the Government that it is Government
land and in pursuance to the said interim direction the documents therein
were registered and since the cause in those writ petitions has been served
this Court had disposed those writ petitions, granting liberty to all the
concerned parties to seek appropriate remedy, subject to outcome of the W.P.
No.19106 of 2010, which is pending for orders before the Division Bench of
this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioners prayed this Court to dispose of
the writ petition by passing similar order as passed in those writ petitions.
8. Learned Assistant Government Pleader has not disputed the same.
9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and recording
the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court deems
it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the registering authority
to receive, register and release the subject document, as expeditiously as
possible, preferably, within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of
receipt of copy of this order. It is made clear that the registration of the subject
document is subject to outcome of the W.P. No.19106 of 2010. It is also made
clear that if either of the parties are aggrieved by the orders to be passed in
W.P.No.19106 of 2010, liberty is granted to parties to pursue their remedies as
available under law.
10. It is made clear that mere registration of the document does not confer
title on the subject property and it is also made clear that this order would not
have any bearing on all those matters where title/rights of the parties are
pending before the authorities either in revision/appeals for adjudication and
in any other case this order also does not preclude the parties in asserting
their rights before a competent Court of law.
11. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous
applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. No order as to cost.
______________________________
N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR,J
12.11.2024
SHA
