IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 16872 of 2008 Between: 1 Velivelli Ranga Rao, S/o. Punnaiah, R/o. Gottipadu Village, Prattipadu Mandal, Guntur District. 2 Velivelli Chenchu Pothuraju, S/o. Ranga Rao, R/o. Gottipadu Village, Prattipadu Mandal, Guntur District. 3 Velivelli Devendrababu, S/o. Ranga Rao, R/o. Gottipadu Village, Prattipadu Mandal, Guntur District. Nos. 2 and 3 being minors Rep. by Guardian Father, Velivelli Rangarao, No.1 referred to above. 4 Velivelli Sudharani, D/o. Ranga Rao, R/o. Gottipadu Village, Prattipadu Mandal, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Sub-Registrar, Prattipadu, Guntur District. 2 District Registrar, Guntur, Guntur District. 3 The Commissioner & Inspector General, Registration and Stamps, Golkonda Cross Roads, Hyderabad. .....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, Order or direction especially in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents, particularly the 1st respondent in not registering the Document No.8/2008 on the file of the 1st respondent as Relinquishment Deed (Release Deed) and in treating the same as sale deed and to pay stamp Duty and registration fees accordingly, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of Indian Stamp Act as applicable in Andhra Pradesh and direct the 1st respondent to register the same as Relinquishment deed. Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.N.SRIRAM MURTHY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. No. 16872 of 2008 O R D E R: It appears, an extent of Ac.2-00 of dry land was purchased in the name of 4th petitioner under a registered sale deed bearing document No. 99/2001 of Prattipadu Sub-Registrar’s Office, by 1st petitioner’s father. However, 4th petitioner executed a relinquishment deed in favour of petitioners 1, 2 and 3 in respect of her share in the joint family property including Ac.2-00 purchased in her name by her father, and presented the same for registration, duly affixing requisite stamp duty. However, the same was not registered, stating that the purport of the document seems to be sale but not relinquishment, particularly, when part of the property was purchased in her name and the same is being parted under the deed by the daughter in favour of the father. This approach made by the respondents seems to be atrocious. Firstly, it is the 1st petitioner’s father who purchased the subject land in the name of 4th petitioner, which is not prohibited under the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988. Secondly, it is not her self- acquired property. Thirdly, whether it is self-acquired property or not, she has a right to relinquish her share in the joint family property including the property which was purchased in her name. Though counter is filed by the respondents stating that the intention of the document is to transfer the land in favour of the father and, therefore, it must be deemed that it is a sale, there is no whisper as to under what law the document is treated to be a sale deed and not a relinquishment deed. Therefore, the action of the respondents in not registering the document is liable to be deprecated and, as such, declared as arbitrary and illegal. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the 1st respondent is directed to process, register and release the document No. 8/2008 on his file, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU. Date: 27-11-2009. MVB.