HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.14519 OF 2010 Date: 16th July 2010 Between: Kotagiri Venkata Rao. … Petitioner And The Sub-Registrar, Chintalapudi, West Godavari District & another. … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.14519 OF 2010 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in refusing to receive and register the sale deed with regard to the lands covered by Survey Nos.172/1 and 172/2, admeasuring Ac.3.06 cents and Ac.4.72 cents respectively, situated at Chintampalli village of Chintalapudi Mandal in West Godavari District, as illegal and arbitrary, with a direction to the respondents to receive the said document and register the same. Originally, the above said lands were assigned to the members of Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society, Seethanagaram. By mortgaging the aforesaid lands, loans were obtained by the members of the Society and when the loans were not repaid, the Society, having obtained a decree, has taken up proceedings for execution of the decree under Section 52 of the A.P. Co- operative Societies Act, 1964. In the execution proceedings, the aforesaid lands were put to sale and petitioner is the purchaser in the auction conducted in the execution proceedings. It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to his purchase in the auction, the sale certificates were issued and now he intend to sell the aforesaid two pieces of land and he also received part consideration from the purchasers. It is the grievance of the petitioner that when he presented the document for registration in favour of the purchasers and applied for valuation certificate, the same is refused on the ground that the lands in question are assigned lands, as such, they cannot be registered. It is the case of the petitioner that in view of sale of lands in the auction conducted by the Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society, which lands were mortgaged in favour of the Society, no objection can be raised for registration of such lands, in view of the exemption under Section 6 of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977. Even the learned Government Pleader submits that the petitioner has purchased the lands in question, in the auction conducted in the execution proceedings, which properties are mortgaged in favour of the Society, and as much, as the sale certificates are issued, the subject matter of the writ petition is covered to be disposed of in terms of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Sub-Registrar, Srikalahasti Vs. K.Guravaiah[1]. The very question whether the exemption under A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 will allure to the benefit of purchasers from the Society or not, is considered by a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.7464 of 2009. When the purchasers of the property themselves mortgaged their lands to the Society, it was held in the said case that the benefit of exemption, as contemplated under Section 6 of the Act, will allure to the benefit of purchasers also, and the same is further confirmed by a Division Bench in the case of Sub- Registrar, Srikalahasti (1 supra). In that view of the matter, the subject matter of this writ petition is covered to be disposed of in terms of the Division Bench judgment of this Court referred above. Following the judgment in the case of Sub-Regitrar, Srikalahasti (1 supra), this writ petition is allowed with a direction to the respondents to accept and consider for registration of the lands covered by Survey Nos.172/1 and 172/2, admeasuring Ac.3.06 cents and Ac.4.72 cents respectively, situated at Chintampalli village of Chintalapudi Mandal in West Godavari District, without raising any objection on the ground that the said lands were assigned lands, provided the sale deeds are in accordance with the provisions of the Stamp Duty and Registration Act. Writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 16th July 2010 ajr [1] 2009 (2) ALD 250