THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.31722 of 2010 Date: 16.12.2010 Between: Smt. Reddipalli Anasuya ..... Petitioner AND The District Registrar, Visakhapatnam and others .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri P. Laxma Reddy Counsel for Respondents: Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.2 in registering the documents presented by the petitioner in respect of the land in survey Nos.56/2 and 57/2 of Pothinamallayyapalem Village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal and District and keeping the same pending as illegal and arbitrary. The averments contained in the affidavit and the material on record show that the maternal grandfather of the petitioner - late Puppala Appalaswamy was assigned an extent of Acs.5.00 in the aforementioned survey numbers under ex-serviceman quota on 08.08.1965. The petitioner’s maternal aunt – Meenakshi filed O.S.No.81 of 1996 in the Court of the learned II Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam, for partition. The said suit was decreed on 09.09.1999 and a final decree was passed on the basis of a compromise. The petitioner claimed to have got the B marked portion of the suit schedule property while other family members have got remaining three shares. The petitioner claims that the balance shares of her brothers were purchased by her under the agreement of sale- cum-General Power of Attorney dated 10.12.1998 and a part of the property was sold by her to third parties under registered sale deeds in the years 1999 and 2001. When a part of the said land was sought to be sold by Puppala Tulasi Ram and Smt. Neduri Meenakshi in terms of the decree passed in the abovementioned suit, the Sub-Registrar has refused to register the documents and they filed W.P.No.15209 of 2009 which was allowed on 01.02.2010 with the direction to the Sub-Registrar to register the documents. When the petitioner presented two documents for registration in respect of 1400 sq. yards on 21.10.2010, they were kept pending by respondent No.2 and he has referred the issue relating to the genuineness or otherwise of the assignment in question to respondent No.4. The petitioner further pleaded that respondent No.4, through his communication dated 20.11.2010, has confirmed the genuineness of the assignment granted in favour of the petitioner’s grandfather. The abovenoted facts would clearly reveal that the genuineness of the assignment was confirmed by respondent No.4 and even this Court allowed W.P.No.15209 of 2009 in respect of registration of a part of the land in the same survey numbers by directing respondent No.2 to admit the document presented by the petitioner therein for registration and that if the same has already been registered, it shall be released forthwith. In the light of these facts, I am of the opinion that there is no justification for respondent No.2 to keep the documents presented by the petitioner pending without releasing the same after registration. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed directing respondent No.2 to register and release the documents to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.40336 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 16th December, 2010 GHN