Sri B S Anil Kumar vs The State Of Karnataka on 19 March, 2014

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri B S Anil Kumar vs The State Of Karnataka on 19 March, 2014

Bench: S.Abdul Nazeer

                           1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

      DATED THIS THE 19th DAY OF MARCH, 2014

                        BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.ABDUL NAZEER

        WRIT PETITION No.8428/2014 (GM-RN)

BETWEEN:

1.    SRI B.S.ANIL KUMAR,
      AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
      S/O LATE B.SANGAPPA.

2.    SMT N.GEETHA,
      AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
      W/O B.S.ANIL KUMAR.

      BOTH R/AT NO.746,
      14TH CROSS, 32ND MAIN,
      J.P.NAGAR, I PHASE,
      SARAKKI LAYOUT,
      BANGALORE-560 079.
                                    ... PETITIONERS

(BY MS.SHOBHA.S.BHAVIKATTI, ADV.)

AND

1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
      DEPARTMENT OF STAMPS
      & REGISTRATION,
      NO.344, 3RD FLOOR,
      VIDHANA SOUDHA,
      BANGALORE - 560 001,
      BY ITS SECRETARY.

2.    THE SUB-REGISTRAR,
      GANDHINAGAR,
      BANGALORE-560 001.
                            2



3.   THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR,
     GANDHINAGAR,
     BANGALORE-560 001.
                                          ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI VIJAYAKUMAR.A.PATIL, HCGP FOR R1 & R2)

      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE R-2 TO ENDORSE THE SALE DEED DATED
27.7.2013 VIDE ANN-A [DUPLICATE] AND REGISTERED ON
27.7.2013    VIDE    ANN-A,    EXECUTED    BY    SRI
C.SATHYANARAYANA AND OTHERS IN FAVOUR OF SRI
B.S.ANIL KUMAR AND ANOTHER VIDE DOCUMENT
NO.1495/13-14 AS THE ORIGINAL OR IN THE
ALTERNATIVE TO INCLUDE PAGE NO.5 IN THE DUPLICATE
SALE DEED INTO THE ORIGINAL SALE DEED EXECUTED
BY SRI C.SATHYANARAYANA AND OTHERS IN FAVOUR OF
SRI B.S.ANIL KUMAR AND ANOTHER VIDE DOCUMENT
NO.1495/13-14 VIDE ANN-C.

    THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:

                       ORDER

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioners presented Annexure-A sale deed dated 27.07.2013 for registration before the second respondent along with a second set at Annexure-B. The second respondent registered the document on the same day as document No.1495/13-

14. The second set at Annexure-B was also registered 3 on the same day. It appears that page.No.5 of the original sale deed at Annexure-A was not scanned. However, the second set has been correctly scanned. Since there is an error in scanning the document, the petitioner made a representation dated 13.01.2014 to the second respondent to rectify the defect while registering the document at Annexure-A.

3. The second respondent has sent the said application to the District Registrar who is the Competent Authority to rectify the error under Section 68 (2) of the Registration Act, 1908. Since, the said representation has not been considered by the second respondent, the petitioners have filed this writ petition for a mandamus directing the respondents to rectify the error in scanning the sale deed at Annexure-A.

4. Perusal of the sale deed at Annexure-A indicates that page No.5 of the said document has not scanned. However, the second set at Annexure-B has been correctly scanned. It appears that there is an error 4 while scanning the document. I direct the third respondent to consider the application and rectify the error in accordance with law within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. No costs.

SD/-

JUDGE VM

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court