Sri Gopisetty Appala Raju & Ors. v. State of A.P & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 13 Apr 2006
- Bench
- V V S RAO
Outcome
Allowed
Following the same, this writ petition is allowed directing the respondents 2
Provisions considered
Judgment
Cause title
Sri Gopisetty Appala Raju and others. ….PETITIONERS AND State of A.P., rep. By its Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. ….RESPONDENTS THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO
WRIT PETITION NO. 6639 OF 2006
ORDER:
Operative part
The petitioners, who are 25 in number, filed the instant writ petition seeking a writ of Mandamus to declare the notification issued by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.583, dated 04.05.2005, under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 as amended by the Andhra Pradesh Act No.4 of 1999 (A.P.Amendment Act, for brevity) as unconstitutional and ultra vires. The petitioners also seek a consequential direction to respondents 2 and 3 to register the sale deeds executed by the petitioners 1 to 22 in favour of petitioners 23 to 25 relating to different number of plots situated at Madhurawada village, Chinagadili Mandal, Visakhapatnam. The Supreme Court of India in State of Rajasthan v Basant Nahata, invalidated Section 22-A of the Rajasthan Registration Act, 1976 which is in pari materia with Section 22-A of A.P.Amendment Act. Following the same, a Division Bench of this Court comprising their Lordships the Hon’ble the Chief Justice, G.S.Singhvi, and the Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Subhash Reddy, in an unreported Judgment in W.P.No.14099 of 2003 and batch, dated 07.12.2005, declared Section 22-A of A.P.Amendment Act as ultra vires. Following the same, this writ petition is allowed directing the respondents 2 and 3 to accept and register the sale deeds as and when they are presented by petitioners 1 to 22. If there are any valid reasons, it shall be open to the respondents 2 and 3 to reject the registration after giving sufficient reasons, in which case, it is open to the petitioners to file an appeal under Section 72 of the Registration Act, 1908. No costs. _____________
(V.V.S.RAO,J)
13.04.2006 VGB
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Following the same, this writ petition is allowed directing the respondents 2
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Registration Act, 1908 — s. 72; Andhra Pradesh Act.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 13 Apr 2006. The bench was V V S RAO.
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.