IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 14449 of 2008 Between: 1 Gorantla Lakshmana Dasu S/o.Narasimha Rao R/o.Kakanipalem Addanki village & Mandal, Prakasam District 2 Kasa Pullaiah S/o.Pullaiah R/o.Indiranagar, Addanki village & Mandal, Prakasam District 3 Makkella Venkata Subba Rao S/o.Subba Rao R/o.Ura Tank Addanki village & Mandal, Prakasam District 4 Bapireddy Koti Reddy S/o.Pedda Rami Reddy R/o.Sankavarappadu village Addanki Mandal, Prakasam District ..... PETITIONERS AND The Sub Registrar, Addanki,Prakasam District .....RESPONDENT 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 of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the action of the Respondents in not registering the document bearing No.P26/8 dated 24.5.2008 in respect of the land admeasuring Ac.2.80 cents in Sy.No.673/2 situated at Kalavakur village, Addanki Mandal, Prakasam District as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and contrary to the provisions of Registration Act and the Rules framed thereunder and consequentially direct the respondent to release the document bearing No.P26/8 dated 24.5.2008 after its registration in accordance with law. Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.M.S.N.PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled by the petitioners aggrieved by the action of the respondent in not releasing the document dated 24.5.2008 even after its registration. It is the case of the petitioners that they purchased an extent of Ac.2.80 cents of land comprised in Sy.No.673/2 of Kalavakuru Village, Addanki Mandal, Prakasam District from its original owner vide a sale agreement with possession and general power of attorney. When the said document was presented for registration before the respondent on 24.5.2008 after paying all the necessary stamp duty and complying with all other legal formalities, the same was kept pending and not released. Therefore, they made a representation on 12.6.2008 to the respondent to release the document after registration but so far no action has been taken on their representation and the document is not released so far. Hence this writ petition. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court on 18.7.2008, the respondent has ﬁled a counter aﬃdavit inter alia stating that when the petitioners presented the document for registration, one Gunji Yedukondalu ﬁled a protest petition alleging that the schedule property, which was being sold by the executants was already purchased by him from one Sri Shaik Mastaan Saheb under a registered sale deed and that the person who is executing the sale agreement –cum- GPA is in no way concerned with the schedule property and that the matter is in litigation before the civil Court in O.S.No.161 of 1996 on the ﬁle of the Principal District Munsif’s Court, Addanki and, therefore, the document was kept pending. However, it is admitted in the counter aﬃdavit that the petitioners have complied with the provisions of the Act but the document was kept pending only on the protest petition ﬁled by the said Yedukonalu and that the document cannot be returned until it is registered. After ﬁling of the counter aﬃdavit, W.P.M.P.No.23710 of 2008 was ﬁled by one Gunji Edukondalu and Mannem Srinivasa Rao seeking impleadment in the writ petition stating that the petitioners rushed to this Court without answering to the objections raised by the Sub-Registrar. It is stated that in fact a suit is pending before the Principal District Munsif for injunction and, therefore, the document presented by the petitioners cannot be registered. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue and the learned counsel appearing for the implead petitioners and at their request the writ petition itself is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself. It is an admitted fact that the petitioners have presented the document for registration after complying with all the formalities and also after paying the necessary registration fees and stamp duty. It is even admitted by the registering authorities in their counter aﬃdavit that the petitioners have complied with all the formalities but only on the objection raised by the implead petitioners herein, the document was not released. It is settled law that once a document is presented for registration in accordance with the provisions of the Act, it is incumbent on the part of the registering authorities to register the document unless it is otherwise in order and there are no speciﬁc court orders directing the registering authorities not to register any transaction in respect of a particular property. This Court also in W.P.Nos.5560 of 2008 has held that mere registration of a document does not confer any right on the person who is presenting the document over the said property unless its vendor has any right and title to the said property. Therefore, pendency of the suit between the petitioners and the implead petitioners does not prevent the Sub-Registrar to register the document. Since the implead petitioners have already ﬁled a civil suit, they are at liberty to adjudicate their rights before the competent civil Court. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Sub-Registrar, Addanki, the 1st respondent herein to register and release the document presented by the petitioners, if it is otherwise in order. No order as to costs. N.V.RAMANA,J DT.29.8.2008 Msv …... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Sub Registrar, Addanki,Prakasam District 2 2CCs to Govt.Pleader for Revenue, High Court of A.P. Hyd 3 2CD copies