Karanam Sanyasi v. The Sub-Registrar
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that:
Provisions considered
Judgment
The petitioner claims to be the vendor of land admeasuring 1,000 square yards in survey No.16/1 of Cheemalapalli Village, Porlupalem Panchayat, Pendurthy Mandal, Visakhapatnam. He claims to have approached the respondent for presentation of a deed of transfer in respect of the said land and complains that the respondent is refusing to receive the same for registration, without furnishing any specific reasons.
Operative part
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. The Indian Stamp Act and the Registration Act prescribe the procedure to be followed by the registering authorities, whenever a document is presented for registration. Section 22-A of the Registration Act, which empowered the Government to issue notification, prohibiting registration of any document in relation to land mentioned in such notification, was held to be unconstitutional. However, altogether a new provision with the same number 22-A has been introduced by the Andhra Pradesh State Legislature through Act 19 of 2007. It came into force with effect from 08.06.2007. It enlists the circumstances under which the registering authority can refuse to admit the document to registration. The question as to whether the document, that may be presented by the petitioner, attracted by the newly introduced Section 22-A or any other provision, needs to be examined by the respondent. The occasion to examine the document would arise, if only, it is received. The respondent cannot refuse to receive the document. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that: (a) the respondent shall receive the document that may be presented by the petitioner and examine the same with reference to the relevant provisions of law including Section 22-A of the Registration Act, introduced through Act 19 of 2007; and (b) in case the document is otherwise admissible to registration, the respondent shall register it within one(1) week from the date of its presentation, duly ensuring that it is otherwise in order and if there exist any reasons for not registering the document, he shall communicate the same in writing to the petitioner within that time. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________
28.06.2007
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that:
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Stamp Act, 1899; Registration Act, 1908.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 28 Jun 2007. The bench was L NARASIMHA REDDY.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.