Telangana High Court
Smt. Busireddy Arun Jyothi And 3 Others vs The State Of Telangana And 4 Others on 8 July, 2019
Author: P.Naveen Rao
Bench: P.Naveen Rao
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
WRIT PETITION NO.13621 OF 2019
Date: 08.07.2019
Between:
Smt. Busireddy Arun Jyothi, W/o.B.Mahender Reddy,
Age 57 yrs, Housewife,
R/o.H.No.6-1-72, Flat No.B-401,
Sree Mahalakshmi Meadows,
Lakdikapool, Hyderabad,
Telangana & others.
.....Petitioners
And
The State of Telangana,
rep. by its Prl.Secretary
Revenue Department,
Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others.
.....Respondents
The Court made the following:
2
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
WRIT PETITION NO.13621 OF 2019
ORDER :
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents.
2. Petitioners claim that they purchased plot No.141 (Eastern portion) admeasuring 325 Square yards and Plot No.142 (Western portion), admeasuring 75 Square Yards, in Survey No.5/3 of Raidurg Panmaktha Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, from one Mantina Ramakrishna Raju. Petitioners trace the history of flow of title and claims that the title is valid. The Special Grade Deputy Collector and Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division, Ranga Reddy District, filed L.G.C.No.13 of 2004 before the Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, Hyderabad, seeking a declaration that the land owners in the said Survey No.5 are land grabbers and they are liable to be evicted. The Special Court, by order, dated 27.12.2004, held that any alienation made or any construction made in the schedule property shall be subject to the result of the L.G.C. The said L.G.C. was transferred to the civil Court and renumbered as L.G.O.P.No.1083 of 2016 and is pending on the file of XV Additional District Judge, Miyapur. The petitioners allege that the deed of conveyance presented by them before the registering authority on the above described property was refused without assigning any reason. Hence, this Writ Petition.
3
3. Learned counsel on both sides state that the issue raised in this Writ Petition is covered by the order, dated 13.04.2005, in W.P.No.6778 of 2005.
4. For reasons alike, this Writ Petition is also disposed of with a direction to the respondents to receive the document executed in favour of the petitioners in respect of the subject properties as and when presented; process and register the same in accordance with law. However, it is made clear that the order of the Special Court in I.A.No.353 of 2004 in L.G.C.No.13 of 2004 shall be binding on the petitioners and their vendor, and the transaction in question shall be subject to the result of the main L.G.C. It is also made clear that in case there is any other objection for registering the documents by the registering authorities, such objection(s) shall be communicated to the petitioners and their vendor within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Pending miscellaneous petitions shall stand closed.
__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J 8th July, 2019 Rds