Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Gamya Karanam Madhu vs The State Of Ap on 7 March, 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY . THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINETEEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.SEETHARAMA MURTI WRIT PETITION NO: 507 OF 2019 Between: GSamya Karanam Madhu, S/o. Madhu Karanam, private sérvice, Rio. 2951, S.King Drive, 1141, Chicago, Ilinois, USA, Rep. through pawer of Attorney Holder Madhu Karanam, S/o. Sriramulu Pillai, aged about 55 years, Ria. 22/273/3, Lawyers Colony, Kattamanchi, Chitoor Town AP. PETITIONER AND 1. The State of AP, Rep. by its Princinal Secretary, Department of Revenue, secretariat, Gollapuci, Amaravaihi, AP 2. The Cammissioner and Inspector General of Stamps and Registration, 5-59, RUC. Spring Valley Apartments, Edupugallu, Kankipadu Mandal, A.P. Viiayawada- 521151 The District Registrar, Stamps and Registration, Tirupathi, Chitaor District. 4 The Joint Sub-Registrar, R.O., Chitoor, 3 oe OS - RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in th circumstances stated in the affidavit fled therewith, the High Court may be pleased t issue any wril or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ or mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent No.4 in not releasing the P.248 of 2078 dt. 29.06.2018 and P. 249 of 2018 dt. 30.06.2018 even alter registration of the saie deed and mortgage deed pertaining te the petitioner and consequently direct the respandents to release registered sale deed to the power of atiorney holder of the petitioner Ge QO 1A NO: 1 OF 2019 Petition under Section 154 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit flac in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased To direct the respondents to release the registered sale deed presented No. P.248 of 2018 dt. 29.06.2018 and P. 249 of 2018 dt. 30.06.2018 to the petitioner and/or to har pawer af attamey halder and pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI AMANCHARLA V. GOPALA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REGISTRATION & STAMPS The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SEETHARAMA MURTI Writ Petition No.507 of 2019 ORDER:
This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Canstitution of india, is filed by the petitioner, seeking verbatim the following relief:
* ta issue any writ ar order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action af the respondent Wo.4 in not releasing the P.248 of 2018 dt.29.06.2018 and P.249 of 2018 dt.30.06.2018 even after registration of the sate deed and mortgage deed pertaining to the petitioner and consequently direct the respondents to release registered sale deed to the power of attorney holder of the petitioner and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit just and proper in the circumstances of the case."
Z. | have heard the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Though no counter has been filed by the official 'respondents, learned Government Pleader appearing for the said respondents orally resisted the writ petition, based on the written instructions, dated 29.01.2019, a copy of which is placed on record. | have perused the material record.
3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is this: "One Muniamma was the owner of the house property bearing Municipal Door nos.18-697, 698 & 699 admeasuring 115 Sq. yards situated at Muthu Mestry Street, Chittoor Town. The petitioner purchased the said property from the said Muniamma for a valuable consideration of Rs.95,00,000/- after availing loan from M/s. Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Limited ('DHFL').
The petitioner paid huge stamp duty of Rs.4,74,100/-, vide challan, dated 14.06.2018. The petitioner paid transfer duty of Rs.1,42,500/- &
2. paid registration fee of Rs.95,000/- vide challan, dated 14.06.2018, along with user charges of Rs.250/- for registration of the sale deed executed by the said vendor in favour of the petitioner. When the document is presented for registration before the 4t réspondent-Joint sub Registrar, Chittoor, necessary receipt and presentation no.248 of 2918 were generated. However, the respondents did not release the document till date even after registration of the sale deed. The respondents also did not release the mortgage deed, which is related to the mortgage transaction in favour of the creditor, When the petitioner made enquiries, she came to knaw that the son of the vendor filed a suit for partition against the vendor and that a Civil Court passed orders not to alienate the property. However, as per the settled law, registration of a document cannot be Stepped by the registration authorities for whatever reasons. The mere pendency of a partition suit does not brevent either the vendor from executing a registered sale deed or the purchaser from obtaining a registered sale deed. Since the property was purchased by availing loan from M/s. DHFL, the officers of the said Finance Company are harassing the petitioner for submitting house Property sale deed and deed of mortgage: and, though the petitioner was not at fault, they are threatening the petitioner by stating that the petitioner has to face prosecution, The sale deed, after its registration has to be submitted to the Financier as per the guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India. Further, the memorandum of mortgage executed in favour of = M/s. DHEL is also pending before the 4th respondent for registration; vide P,249/2018, dated 30.06.2018. The petitioner, who ts a purchaser, is not a party to the litigation between the vendor and her son. Hence, the respondents ought to have released the sale deed and the mortgage deed, Hence, the present writ petition is filed.' = 2
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, having reiterated the pleaded case of the petitioner, submits that the property is not admittedly in the list of prohibited properties under Section 22-A of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, and that the sale deed as well as the mortgage deed are being withheld. without being released, merely because a suit for partition filed by the son of the vendor is pending and that in that suit an injunction is granted restraining the vendor from alienating the property.
5. Learned Government Pleader submitted as follows: 'The document nos.P.248 & P.249 were presented for registration before the 4° respondent-Joint Sub Registrar-l, Chittoor, on 29.06.2018 & 30.06.2018, respectively. The Presiding Officer of the Vacation Court/ District Court, Chittoor, passed orders, dated 28.05.2018, in LA.no.260 of 2018 in O.$.n0.95 of 2018 restraining the respondent in the said suit from alienating the subject property. As per Standing Order 219(b) of the Registration Manual Part-ll, the registration of the above documents was kept pending. Further, the regular Presiding Officer of the VHI Additional District Court, Chittoor, made absolute, the order of interim injunction granted in the aforesaid suit. Hence, registration of the documents is kept pending. {If the petitioner wants the documents to be registered, she has to approach the civil Court and get the injunction orders vacated. Having knowledge of the interim injunction orders, if the subject documents are registered & or released, the vendor as well as the petitioner would be expasing themselves for action for cantempt/violation of the orders of temporary injunction granted by a civil Court. Further, the petitioner did not impiead the son of the vendor, who filed the suit against her as a party respondent to the writ petition, though the petitioner is seeking a relief, which if granted & affects the rights af the said person. The registration of the docurnents would be aiding the parties to the suit as well as the petitioner herein to violate the injunction orders not to alienate the property, granted by a competent civil Court. Hf the Joint Sub Registrar concerned registers the documents and/or releases the same, he may also be expased to the allegations that he had violated the injunction orders granted by a competent civil Court, having knowledge of the same. Hence, in the facts & circumstances, the Joint Sub Registrar is justified in not registering and releasing the documents bearing nos.P.248 & P 249."
&, Since, on written instructions, the learned Government Pleader stated that the dacuments are pending registration, a clarification was sought as to whether the documents were registered and are not being released or whether the documents are kept pending even without registering the same. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to clarify the position. He stated that he jis also not aware of the actual position.
7. | have given earnest consideration to the facts & submissions,
8. It is fairly conceded that the Civil Court's injunction orders referred to above are in force. {t is settled law that a Court while exercising a judicial function would ordinarily not pass an order, which if passed, would make the parties to the Us or a third party to violate a lawful arder passed by another Court. No public servant shall perform an act, which if performed, would result in encouraging a party to the lis to violate a lawful arder of a Court. Therefore, the Joint Sub Registrar concerned is justified in keeping the registration/and or release of the subject documents with numbers P 248 & P 249 pending. As long as the above said injunction orders are in operation, the petitioner cannot seek 7 the relief claimed in the writ petition by invoking the equity jurisdiction of this Court. Doctrine of comity or amity requires this Court not to pass an order, which comes in conflict with the injunction orders passed by a competent Court of law.
9. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed.
There shall be ne arder as ta costs.
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR UPRUE COPYH sg SECTION OFFICER One Fair Copy to the Hor'ble Sri. Justice M. SEETHARAMA MORTI To, Oo 4b wo Ne (For His Lordhips Kind Perusal) 9 LR Copies The Under Secretary, Union of india Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs, New Delhi.
The Secretary, Advocate Association Library, High Court of Andhra Praclesh.
One CC to Sri. Amancharla V. Gopala Rao, Advocate (OPUC) Ywo CCs to the GP for Registration & Stamps, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. (OUT) Two CD Copies.
HIGH COURT DATED: 07/03/2079 ORDER WP.No.507 of 2019 tlh Dismusstay the WE Without costs,