IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 14305 of 2008 Between: Gandham Krishna Rao S/o.Jagga Rao R/o.Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Sub-Registrar-1, Gunupudi, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. 2 The Commercial Tax Officer, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing the letter Ref.A7/372/07 dated 8.4.2008 to the 1st respondent and also the action of the 1st respondent rejecting the alienation of property of Plot No.51 which is situated in Industrial Area at Bheemavaram, West Godavari, as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 1st respondent to register the said plot No.51 of the petitioner and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.N.MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR} O R D E R:- This writ petition is ﬁled seeking a mandamus to declare the action of the 1st respondent-Joint Sub-Registrar in refusing to register the document for selling away the property in Plot No.51 situated at Industrial Area, Bheemavaram, West Godavari District, as arbitrary and illegal, and consequently direct the 1st respondent to register Plot No.51 of the petitioner. The petitioner asserts that himself, his mother and his two brothers, who are the partners, started business in the manufacture of biscuits, bread and bun. The A.P. Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, allotted them Plot No.51 situated at Industrial Area, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District in the name of M/s.Krishna & Krishna Bread Unit in the year 1990, and the petitioner is the managing partner of the ﬁrm. While so, owing to certain reasons, this ﬁrm was not running proﬁtably and it was closed, and hence, the petitioner sold the property to Divvi Mallikarjuna Rao and got registered half of the property i.e. Ac.0.08 cents on 15.5.2008 with a view to clearing sundry debts and for investing money in M/s.Sri Krishna Biscuit Manufacturing Company, which is owned by his brother. Now, the petitioner’s grievance is that when he approached the 1st respondent to get registered the remaining half of the property in Plot No.51, the 1st respondent orally refused to register the Plot on the ground that the 2nd respondent-Commercial Tax Oﬃcer addressed a letter to the 1st respondent not to alienate any of the property belonging to the petitioner and his partners alleging that M/s.Krishna Biscuit Manufacturing Company fell in arrears of taxes to the Department to an extent of Rs.18.39 lakhs. The 1st respondent has ﬁled counter aﬃdavit contending as follows: “I submit that it is true that the 2nd respondent has addressed a letter to the 1st respondent directing not to allow any Registration for alienation of the properties owned by the petitioner and his partners in the ﬁrms. The said letter is not binding on the 1st respondent. As a Sub- registrar, I am bound by the Provisions of the Stamp Act and Registration Act and if any document is presented by the petitioner the same will be processed in accordance with the Provisions of the Stamp Act and Registration Act and without presenting the document before the 1st respondent by making false, self-serving statement, the present writ petition is filed.” Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the 1st respondent and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax appearing for the 2nd respondent and perused the material placed on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the action of the 1st respondent in not entertaining the document for registering the property in Plot No.51 is contrary to the provisions of the Stamp and Registration Act and the 2nd respondent has no jurisdiction to prevent the 1st respondent for registering Plot No.51. In view of the averments made in the counter aﬃdavit, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent- Joint Sub-Registrar to receive the document submitted by the petitioner, process the same in accordance with the provisions of the Stamp and Registration Act and register it if it is otherwise in order. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 31st July, 2008 bcj