Telangana High Court
Village Reconstruction Organisation vs State Of Telangana And 3 Others on 23 September, 2020
Author: A.Abhishek Reddy
Bench: A.Abhishek Reddy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.285 of 2020
ORDER:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent Nos.1 to 3. With their consent, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.
The main grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that the respondent No.3 is refusing to register the sale deed presented by the petitioner in respect of the land to an extent of Ac.1-10 cents in survey Nos.167 and 168/AA2 situated at Kurmedu Village, Chinthapalli Mandal, Nalgonda District, based on the letter addressed by respondent No.4 vide letter No.GR/GNT/19150/Zone-IV/2019/657, dated 04.11.2019, requesting the respondent No.3 to keep a hold on the subject property.
It is settled principle of law that registration cannot be refused, except when the lands are prohibited from registration duly mentioning the property in the 'prohibitory list' maintained under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908, by the competent authority. More particularly, when the lands are private patta lands, the registrations cannot be stopped solely on the basis of the communication written by some authority. In the case on hand, the registration authorities refused to register the document, based on the letter addressed by respondent No.4, which is legally untenable. Section 71 of the Act also mandates the registration authorities to put the reasons for refusal in writing. 2
Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short 'the Act') reads as follows:
Reasons for refusal to register to be recorded.--
(1) Every Sub-Registrar refusing to register a document, except on the ground that the property to which it relates is not situated within his sub-district shall make an order of refusal and recorded his reasons for such order in his Book No.2, and endorse the words "registration refused" on the document; and, on application made by any person executing or claiming under the document, shall, without payment and unnecessary delay, give him a copy of the reasons so recorded.
(2) No registering officer shall accept for registration a document so endorsed unless and until, under the provisions hereinafter contained, the document is directed to be registered.
This Court, while dealing with the letter issued by the Commissioner, Endowments Department to the Registration Authorities, in Pasuparthi Jayaram and others v. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others1, has held as under:
".... In the event the Religious/Charitable/ Endowment/Wakf Institution seeks to assert any right over a property, prohibition as to registration of documents relating to such property can operate only if a notification is issued under Section 22-A (2) of the Act of 1908 in connection with Section 22-A (1)(e) thereof.
In the absence of a notification under Section 22-A (2), it is not open to the Endowments Department to communicate a list of properties allegedly owned by the religious institutions by way of a letter and trace the power to do so to Section 22-A(1) (c) of the Act of 1908."1
2013 SCC OnLine AP 694 3 In A.Mohan Rao v. Sub-Registrar, Stamp and Registration Department2, this Court, while dealing with the communication issued by the Commercial Tax Officer to the Registration Authorities, has held as under:
"..... It is no part of his duty to verify the title of the vendor or the capacity of the purchaser. Where, however, specific prohibition against registration exists, be it in the form of order passed by the competent Court or a provision of law, the registration can certainly be refused. For instance, Section 22-A of the Registration Act, as amended through Act 19 of 2007, prohibits registration of documents pertaining to the properties owned by the government, assigned lands or the properties owned by the religious institutions. Registration of documents in respect of such properties can certainly be refused. Further, if a Court of law passes an order of injunction prohibition alienation of an item of property, registration of documents in relation to such property become untenable.
In addition to the two categories referred to above, there may be instances where an authority of the State passes an order of attachment, in exercise of the power under any specific provision of law. For instance, under the Revenue Recovery Act, attachment can be affected by the Recovery Officer before the property is brought to sale. Once an order of attachment is brought to the notice of the registering authority, he is at liberty to refuse the registration."
In P.Srinivasulu and others Vs. Sub-Registrar, Renigunta, Chittoor District and Others3, this Court, while dealing with the communication issued by the Commissioner, Endowments Department, to the Registration Authorities, has held as under: 2
2012 (5) ALD 289 3 2013 (1) ALT 345 4 "...... whenever there is a bona fide claim with regard to title and possession by any third party, such claim cannot be curtailed merely on the ground that such land belonging either government or Religious Institutions. The complicated questions with regard to title land possession cannot be gone into by the respondents by preventing transfer of lands in exercise of the power under Section 22-A of the Registration Act. When there is a bona fide claim by a private person in respect of immovable property of the Government or Religious Institution or any Local Body, covered by Section 22-A(1)(c) of the Registration Act, it is for such Government, Religious Institution of Local Body to approach competent forum or Court to establish their right. But the claim of the bona fide purchaser cannot be deprived of, by preventing transfer of land smacking communications to the Registering Authorities."
In view of the law laid down by this Court in the above referred cases coupled with the provision of Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908, the refusal by the Registration Authorities to register the document presented by the petitioner cannot be countenanced and is liable to be set aside.
For the above stated reasons, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Registering Authority to receive, process, register and release the document presented by the petitioner, subject to the petitioner complying with the provisions of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, and Indian Stamps Act, 1899. It will be open to the Registering Authority to refuse/receive the document presented before him, if he has any other objection, by duly assigning reasons in support of such decision and communicate the said decision to the petitioner. However, any such registration shall be treated as a provisional one. It is made clear that mere registration of the document does not confer any title to the property. The 5 petitioner shall not claim equities in case any adverse orders are passed against him. If any proceedings/suit/ appeal are pending between the executant of the document/government or any other interested party, the registration of the document will be subject to the result of that proceedings/suit/ appeal. It is also made clear that this order does not preclude the Government/District Collector to take appropriate steps as warranted by law and to assert its title.
The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
________________________ A.ABHISHEK REDDY, J Date : 23-09-2020.
sur