Telangana High Court
Sri Narayan Kannan vs State Of Telangana on 30 September, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.25885 of 2024
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.H.Rakesh
Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and
Registration appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3. 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 declare the action of the respondents in not receiving
and registering the sale deeds along with all necessary
documents executed by the petitioner in favour of (i)
B.Suchitravani and another in respect of H.No.10-3-258
covered by plot No.258 in Sy.No.74/11, admeasuring 50
sq.yds., at East Marredpally, Addagutta, Vaddar Basti,
Secunderabad."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is
the owner and possessor of the House Nos.10-3-258 and 10-3-258/A,
admeasuring 100 sq.yds, at plot No.258, at Sy No.74/11, East
Marredpally, Secunderabad, having acquired the same through
registered sale deeds bearing Doc.No.4345/2022 dated 23.12.2022
and Doc.No.289/2023 dated 28.01.2023 registered at SRO,
Marredpally, Secunderabad. It is further submitted that the petitioner,
with an intention to sell the subject property, executed draft sale deed
and approached the respondent No.3 for registration. However,
respondent No.3 has refused to register the subject document basing
on the ground that Sy.No.74 in Cantonment area is under prohibitory
list. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner 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 petitioner 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 petitioner 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
30.09.2024
mrm
