Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908. - a mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.3 in not receiving and registering the document sought to be presented by the petitioner in respect of plot bearing No.LIG-22 in survey No.164 of Simhapuri layout, Vepagunta Village, Visakhapatnam District as illegal and arbitrary.- In the light of the permission granted by the VUDA which sold the plot to the petitioner, it is not permissible for respondent No.3 to refuse to receive and register the sale deed sought to be presented by the petitioner. Hence, a mandamus shall issue to respondent No.3 to receive the sale deed from the petitioner and process the same in accordance with the provisions of Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908.

WP 147 / 2013

WPSR 218925 / 2012

PETITIONER RESPONDENT SRI KAMINENI HAD KRISHNA RAO, KRISHNA DIST   VS COMMISSIONER & INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION & STAMPS PET.ADV. : SUDHA RANI RESP.ADV. : GP FOR REVENUE SUBJECT: STAMPS & REGISTRATION DISTRICT:  VISAKHAPATNAM

FILING DATE:  31-12-2012 POSTING STAGE :  ADMISSION (STAMPS AND REGISTRATION ) DISPOSED ON  :  03-01-2013  ANC REG. DATE    :   02-01-2013 LISTING DATE :  03-01-2013 STATUS   :  ---------

HON'BLE JUDGE(S): C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

WRIT PETITION No.147 of 2013

Dated 03.01.2013

Between:

Sri Kamineni Hari Krishna Rao

          …Petitioner

And

The State of A.P., represented by its Commissioner and Inspector General

of Registration & Stamps, Hyderabad and others

          …Respondents

Counsel for the petitioner: Smt.M.S.V.S.Sudha Rani

Counsel for respondents: Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue

 

The Court made the following:

 ORDER:                           

This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.3 in not receiving and registering the document sought to be presented by the petitioner in respect of plot bearing No.LIG-22 in survey No.164 of Simhapuri layout, Vepagunta Village, Visakhapatnam District as illegal and arbitrary.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 

It is the pleaded case of the petitioner that the abovementioned plot was allotted to him by the Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority (VUDA) in the year 1991 and the same was registered in his favour on 18.10.1995.   When the petitioner sought to sell the said plot, he approached the VUDA for permission as per the terms of the sale deed. Accordingly, the VUDA by its proceedings vide Plot No.LIG-22/S.P/F4 dated 18.10.2012 granted permission to the petitioner subject to his payment of Rs.40,186/-.  It is the further pleaded case of the petitioner that when he approached respondent No.3 for receiving the sale deed, he has refused to receive the same without giving any reasons.

In the light of the permission granted by the VUDA which sold the plot to the petitioner, it is not permissible for respondent No.3 to refuse to receive and register the sale deed sought to be presented by the petitioner. 

Hence, a mandamus shall issue to respondent No.3 to receive the sale deed from the petitioner and process the same in accordance with the provisions of Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908.

The Writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.

As a sequel, W.P.M.P.No.196 of 2013 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

________________________

C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J

3^rd January, 2013                  

SKA/GHN 

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

WRIT PETITION No.147 of 2013

Dated 03.01.2013

SKA/GHN