THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No.10047 of 2011 O R D E R: This writ petition is directed against the refusal of registering document evidencing the sale of immoveable property presented for registration. The Sub-Registrar has pointed out that as per Section 22- A (1) (c) of the Registration Act, documents relating to transfer of property by way of sale in respect of immoveable property owned by Religious and Charitable Institutions falling under the purview of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 executed by persons other than those statutorily empowered to do so are prohibited from registration. Additionally, the Sub Registrar has also quoted letter dated 13th November, 2008 of the Commissioner of Endowments, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, informing the Sub-Registrar that land covered by Sy.No.62 of Vepagunta Village, Visakhapatnam is owned by Sri Varaha Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Devasthanam at Simhachalam, and the said institution is one which falls within the purview of Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987. Sri B. Satyanarayana, the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners strenuously submits that the document, which is executed on 6th May, 1999 has been kept pending all these years by the Sub- Registrar and based upon a communication, which has been sent up by the Commissioner of Endowments on 13th November, 2008, he could not have declined to register the document, which was presented nearly 10 years before thereto. I am afraid this contention canvassed by the learned counsel for the writ petitioners does not hold water. Any transaction evidencing transfer of immoveable property worth more than Rs.100/- is liable to be compulsorily registered but at the same time one has to take note of Section 22-A, which has been introduced by way of an amendment into the Andhra Pradesh Registration Act which was brought into force with effect from 01.04.1999. In view of introduction of Section 22-A, the Sub-Registrar having received the document presented by the petitioners has kept it pending enquiry as he had entertained a doubt as to whether the transaction concerns land owned by Sri Varaha Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Devasthanam or not. What has been done by the Commissioner of Endowments on 13.11.2008 is a mere reiteration of a fact that the lands situated in Sy.No.62 of Vepagunta Village are in fact owned by Sri Varaha Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Devasthanam at Simhachalam. It is hardly in doubt that the said Devasthanam is regulated by the provisions contained in the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowment Act, 1987. Therefore, by virtue of the provisions contained in Section 22-A, the Sub-Registrar is statutorily prohibited from registering any such document evidencing sale. It is also important to notice that Section 22-A has suffered further improvements by way of amendment through Andhra Pradesh Act 19 of 2007, which was brought into force on 20th June, 2007. The amended provision which is relevant for our enquiry is 22-A (1) (c) and it reads as under:- “Document relating to transfer of property by way of sale, agreement of sale, gift, exchange or lease exceeding (ten) 10 years in respect of immovable property, owned by Religious and Charitable Endowments falling under the purview of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 or by Wakfs falling under the Wakfs Act, 1995 executed by persons other than those statutorily empowered to do so.” The above provision is explicitly clear that all such transactions of sale or gift or exchange or lease deed exceeding 10 years in respect of immoveable property owned by a Religious or Charitable Endowment falling under the purview of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, which are executed by persons other than those statutorily empowered to do so are prohibited from registration. It is not in dispute that the document in question, has not been executed by any one authorised by the said Devasthanam nor was to the sale transaction, the said Devasthanam is a party. Therefore, I do not find any illegality in the action of the Sub-Registrar in declining to register the document of sale presented for registration by the petitioner. Hence, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. --------------------------------------- (NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J) 15th April, 2011 bud