APHC010130392025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESFT AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI^ WRIT PETITION NO: 6859 OF 2025 Between: 1. Sri Karapakula Bhaskar Naidu, S/o Peddaiah Naidu, aged 61 years, Occ: Business, R/o 2-144/3, Sri Lakshminagar, M R Palli, Tirupathi Town, Tirupathi District. 2. Smt. Karapakula Reddemma, W/o. Bhaskar Naidu, aged 56 years, Occ: Home maker, R/o 2-144/3 Sri Lakshmi Nagar, M R Palli, Tirupati Town, Tirupathi District. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Amaravati. 2. The District Collector, Tirupathi, Tirupati District. 3. The District Registrar, Tirupathi, Tirupati District. 4. The Sub-Registrar, Tirupati Urban, Tirupati District. 5. The Tirupati Municipal Corporation, Tirupathi, Tirupati District., Rep by its Commissioner. 6. The Tahsildar, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tirupati District. 7. The Executive Officer, Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam, Tirupathi District. ...Respondents ^ Petition under Article 2^6 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order, writ or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the respondent Nos.4 in not entertaining the process of registration of Mortgage Deed in respect of the petitioners properties situated in Sy.No.623/3C2 situate at Chintalachenu residential area, Tirupati, Tirupati District in ignorance of the ratio laid down in W.P.No.20541/2019, dt. 19.08.2021 and order in W.P. No.34206 of 2022, dt.20.10.2022, and interim orders passed in W.P.No.1777 of 2023 and W.P. No.32182 of 2022 as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and further direct the respondent Nos.4 to register and release the Mortgage Deed infavour of the 5th Respondent and further Direct the 5th Respondent to issue the Building permission to the petitioners Sy.No.623/3C2 situate at 19th Ward, Chintalachenu residential area, Tirupati. in lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 15rCPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent Nos.4 to register the and release the Mortgage Deed in favour of the 5th Respondent and further direct the 5th Respondent to issue the Building permission to the petitioners in Sy.No.623/3C2 situate at 19th Ward, Chintalachenu residential area, Tirupati. ^ Counsel for the Petitioners: M/S. GOUTHAMI SURAPAREDDY _ Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI POTHAM VENGALA REDDY (SC FOR M.CORPORATION IN RAYALASEEMA REGION) Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 6: GP FOR REVENUE ^ Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 3 & 4: GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS Counsel for the Respondent No.7: SMT. V.DYUMANI (SC FOR TTD) X The Court made the following order: i 9r APHC010130392025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 6859/2025 Between: 1.SRI KARAPAKULA BHASKAR NAIDU, S/0 PEDDAIAH NAIDU, AGED 61 YEARS. OCC BUSINESS, R/0 2-144/3, SRI LAKSHMINAGAR, M R PALLI, TIRUPATHI TOWN, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. 2.SMT. KARAPAKULA REDDEMMA,, W/0. BHASKAR NAIDU. AGED 56 YEARS, OCC HOME MAKER, R/0 2-144/3 SRI LAKSHMI NAGAR, M R PALLI, TIRUPATI TOWN, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH. REP BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, AMARAVATI. REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TIRUPATHI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 3.THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, TIRUPATHI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 4.THE SUBREGISTRAR, TIRUPATI URBAN, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 5.THE TIRUPATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, TIRUPATHI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT., REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 6.THE TAHSILDAR, TIRUPATI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 7.THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TIRUMALA TIRUPATI DEVASTHANAM TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. m 2 ...RESPONDENT(S): ‘ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order, writ or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring that the action of the respondent Nos.4 in not entertaining the process of registration of Mortgage Deed in respect of the petitioners properties situated in Sy.No.623/3C2 situate at Chintalachenu residential area, Tirupati, Tirupati District in ignorance of the ratio laid down in W.P.No.20541/2019, dt.19.08.2021 and order in W.P. No.34206 of 2022, dt.20.10.2022, and interim orders passed in W.P.No.l777 of 2023 and W.P. No.32182 of 2022 as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and further direct the respondent Nos.4 to register and release the Mortgage Deed infavour of the 5th Respondent and further Direct the 5th Respondent to issue the Building permission to the petitioners in Sy.No.623/3C2 situate at 19th Ward, Chintalachenu residential area, Tirupati and pass lANO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent Nos.4 to register the and release the Mortgage Deed in favour of the 5th Respondent and further direct the 5th Respondent to issue the Building permission to the petitioners in Sy.No.623/3C2 situate at 19th Ward, Chintalachenu residential area, Tirupati and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.GOUTHAMI SURAPAREDDY Counsel for the Respondent{S): 1.POTHAM VENGALA REDDY SC For M.Corporation in Rayalaseema region In 2.GP FOR REVENUE 3.GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS 4.V.DYUMANI(SCforTTD) The Court made the following: 3 "ORDER:: Heard Sri Veluri Bharath Surender Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Divya Teja, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue of respondents 1 to 4 and 6, Sri P.Vengal Reddy, learned Standing counsel for the 5*^ respondent and Smt. V.Dyumani, learned Standing counsel for the respondent. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that the Mortgage Deed presented by them for registration, the Sub-Registrar is neither receiving nor processing the same. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the 1®* petitioner purchased land admeasuring 200 Sq yards in Sy.No.623/3C of Tirupati town under a registered sale deed dated 02.03.2009. The 2"^ petitioner purchased land admeasuring Ac.229.55 Sq yards in Sy.No.623/3C sub-divided Sy.No.623/3C2 of Tirupati town under registered sale deed document No.721/2009 on 02.03.2009. The petitioners made an application to the 5**^ respondent for the grant of building permission. In the said process, the petitioners intended to mortgage the property, executed a mortgage deed 22.02.2025 and presented the same before the 4'^ respondent. However, the 4**^ respondent neither received nor processed the application. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue would submit that the Commissioner, Endowments Department, Vijayawada issued proceedings vide Lr.in.Rc.No.L1/COE-19027(36)/1/2019 dated 19.12.2019 to keep Ac.61.63 cents in Sy.No.623 apart from other survey numbers under Section 22(A)(1)(C) of the Registration Act, 1908. He would also submit that the total extent of Ac.183.32 cents in Sy.Nos.6, 8A1, 8A2, 9/1, 9/2, -12, 623 and 4073 are included in the list of prohibitory properties under Section 22A(1)(C) of the Registration Act, 1908. Since the properties are included in the list of prohibitory properties, the 4^'^ respondent neither received nor processed the document. as on 4. 4 When a document is presented for registration, the registering authority must receive and process the same, if the document fulfils all the requirements under the Registration Act and the Indian Stamp Act, 1908. The authority, if case of any objection, can pass a refusal order under Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908. If an order of refusal has been passed, an appeal would lie under Section 72 of the Registration Act, 1908. 5. Given the facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of, at the admission stage, with the consent of both the learned counsel, directing the 4"^ respondent to receive the document presented by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders duly recording the reasons as mandated under Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908 within four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. The 4**^ respondent shall also consider the proceedings issued by the Commissioner, Endowments Department, Vijayawada, vide Lr.in.Rc.No.L1/COE-19027(36)/1/2019 dated 19.12.2019. No order as to costs. 6. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- M.RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Amaravati. The District Collector, Tirupathi, Tirupati District. The District Registrar, Tirupathi, Tirupati District. The Sub-Registrar, Tirupati Urban, Tirupati District. The Commissioner, Tirupati Municipal corporation, Tirupa^, Tirupati District. The Tahsildar, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tirupati District. The Executive Officer, Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam, Tirupathi District. One CC to M/s. Gouthami Surapareddy, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri Potham Vengala Reddy, SC For M.Corporation Rayalaseema region In Advocate [OPUC] 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. in 10. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 11. Two CCs to GP for Registration and Stamps, High Court of An^a Pradesh [OUT] 12. One CC to Smt. V.Dyumani (SC for TTD) Advocate [OPUC] 13. Two CD Copies TF “1 HIGH COURT DATED:16/07/2025 ORDER WP NO. 6859 OF 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P. AT THE STAGE OF ADMISSION, WITHOUT COSTS