HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.Nos.27448, 27449, 27450 & 27451 of 2010 Date : 14-12-2010 Between : Chennuboyina Malyadri .. Petitioner And The Sub-Registrar, Sabbavaram, Visakhapatnam District and another .. Respondents Counsel for petitioner : Sri Ravi Shankar Jandhyala Counsel for respondents : Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue The Court made the following : COMMON ORDER: Since all these Writ Petitions raise common issues of fact and law, they are being heard and disposed of by this common order. The petitioners’ request for registration of documents was rejected by respondent No.1 on 2-3-2010. It is the pleaded case of the petitioners that the orders of rejection passed by respondent No.1 were not served on them on 15-3-2010. The petitioners filed appeals before respondent No.4 on 7-4-2010. By the impugned endorsements dated 8-4-2010, respondent No.2 rejected the appeals on the ground that they were not filed within 30 days from the date of the order passed by respondent No.1. I have heard Sri Ravi Shankar Jandhyala and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. This Court in Nakka Surya Bhagavan and another Vs. The State of A.P. [1], had an occasion to consider an identical issue and held as under: “A perusal of the impugned endorsement shows that respondent No.2 has construed the expression “from the date of the order” under Section 71 of Registration Act, 1908 (for short ‘the Act’) in its literal sense instead of understanding the same from a proper perspective, i.e. “from the date of receipt of the order. The Apex Court in D. Saibaba Vs. Bar Council of India and another (2003) 6 SCC 186), while interpreting Section 48-AA of the Advocates Act, 1961 held that the words “from the date of the order” shall be interpreted in such a way as to carry out the purpose for which the remedy is provided, and making the said remedy meaningful, practical and effective. Unless the petitioner receives the order within the period prescribed for limitation, it is not expected of him to avail the appellate remedy within the period of limitation, if the same is reckoned “from the date of the order” and not “from the date of receipt of the order”. Respondent No.2 failed to keep this aspect in mind in indulging in literal construction of the provisions of Section 72 of the Act.” In view of the above legal position, the Writ Petitions are allowed. The impugned endorsements are quashed. Respondent No.2 is directed to dispose of the appeals filed by the petitioners on merits, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, giving opportunity of being heard to the petitioners. ____________________ C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy.,J Date : 14-12-2010 AM [1] W.P.No.28521/2010, dt.26-11-2010