IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.21609 of 2008 Between: 1 A.Ranga Bhashyam S/o. A.Kannaiah R/o. Puttur, Chittoor District. 2 G.Sudarshana Varma S/o. Narayana Raju R/o. SBR Puram, Vadamalpet Mandal, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor. 2 The Sub- Registrar, Puttuur Sub- Registrar Office, Puttur, Chittoor District. .....RESPONDENS 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 a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in insisting for No Objection Certificate to accept the sale deed dt.25.09.2008 executed by the 1st Petitioner in favour of the 2nd Petitioner in respect of the lands admeasuring Acs.2.24 cts, in Sy.No.20/1, situated in Eswarapuram Village accounts, Puttur Mandal, Chittoor District as arbitrary, discriminatory, illegal and contrary to the judgment dt.10.4.2006 in SA No. 1393 of 2003 of this Hon'ble Court, confirming the judgments of both the courts below and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to accept and register the sale deed dt.25.09.2008 in favour of the 2nd respondent in respect of the said lands, without insisting for No Objection Certificate from the 1st respondent or any Other Revenue Authority Subordinate to him and with all other consequential benefits. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.V.JAGAPATHI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.21609 of 2008 ORDER: First petitioner claims to be owner of land admeasuring Acs.2.24 in survey No.230/1 situated at Eswarapuram Village of Puttur Mandal in Chittoor District. It is the ancestral property of first petitioner. He alleges that during survey and settlement operations in 1956-1957, land was wrongly classified as Government poramboke. Then his father, A.Kannaiah Naidu, filed claim petition under Section 11(a) of Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948. The Assistant Settlement Officer, Chittoor, granted ryotwari patta in favour of Kannaiah Naidu and it has become final in SR No.1/11(a)/67/PTR, dated 20.6.1997. Again in 1986, when the land was directed to be leased out by first respondent, first petitioner filed O.S.No.227 of 1986 on the file of the Court of Principal District Munsif, Puttur, for permanent injunction. The suit was decreed on 31.10.1992. It attained finality by judgment of Hon’ble High Court in S.A.No.1393 of 2003, dated 10.4.2006. First petitioner suffered was hospitalized recently and as he required money for his family necessities, he offered the land for sale. Second petitioner agreed to purchase the same. First petitioner executed sale deed in favour of second respondent on 25.9.2008. The same was presented for registration before second respondent on the same day. Allegedly, second respondent refused to receive the same, aggrieved by which, the present writ petition is filed. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. It is no doubt true that when a document is presented, it is incumbent on the part of the Registering Officer to examine the same with reference to Sections 31 to 36 of the Registration Act, 1908 (the Act, for brevity) and/or Rules 26 and 58 of the Andhra Pradesh Rules under the Act. This aspect of the matter was considered by my learned brother Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy in W.P.No.15199 of 2004, dated 01.09.2004. Following the above, this writ petition is disposed of directing second respondent or any other Registering Officer to accept the document presented by petitioners and consider for registration. Be it noted, if for any reason, the document presented is not registered, it is incumbent on the part of the Registering Officer to record and furnish reasons under Section 71 of the Act. Even thereafter, if petitioners have any grievance, they may file appeal before the appellate authority under Section 72 of the Act. Thereafter, if any adverse order is passed by the appellate authority, petitioners can file a suit under Section 77 of the Act. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) December 15, 2008 YS To 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor. 2 The Sub- Registrar, Puttuur Sub- Registrar Office, Puttur, Chittoor District. 3 Two CCs to Government Pleader for Revenue, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. (OUT) 4 Two C.D. Copies.