1 NV,J W.P.No.8455 of 2025 APHC010160332025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] WEDNESDAY ,THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 8455/2025 Between: Arekapudi Venkata Rama Sastry ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS The Court made the following: 2 NV,J W.P.No.8455 of 2025 O R D E R: 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, claiming the following relief: “To issue writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents particularly the inaction of the 4th Respondent in not accepting Petitioners objection under Decree dt. 14-10-2024 in O.S.No.35 of 2024 on the file of the court of PrI. Civil Judge (Senior Division) Machlipatnam, to entertain any document presented by the above named un-official Respondents for registration in respect of land of an extent of Ac.3-34 cents in R.S.No.53/3 situated in Chennuru Village, Pedana Mandal, Krishna District as arbitrary, illegal and violative of right to property guaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents Nos. 2 to 4 to consider the petitioners representation dt 18-03-2025 before processing any document for registration.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner filed O.S.No.35 of 2024 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Machilipatnam against the unofficial respondents i.e. Respondent Nos.5 & 6 for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 30.03.2022 in respect of land of an extent of Ac.3-34 cents in R.S.No.533 situated in Chennuru Village, Pedana Mandal, Krishna District. The said suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner on 14.10.2024 directing the unofficial respondents herein to execute registered sale deed in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner deposited balance of sale consideration and the said judgment and decree 3 NV,J W.P.No.8455 of 2025 became final and none of the parties assailed the matter in appeal. Learned counsel submits that the unofficial respondents are trying to alienate the suit schedule property in favour of third parties and sought for a direction against Respondent No.4/Sub-Registrar not to entertain any registration in respect of the subject property. 3. The learned Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration submits that the official respondents, will not entertain any registration by the third parties in respect of the subject property and the petitioner is only apprehending threat of alienation. Further, he submits that, the official respondents would follow due process of law in the process of registration. 4. Heard Sri Sai Gangadhar Chamarthy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration. None appeared for Respondent Nos.5 & 6. 5. It is settled law that, once the suit is decreed, the parties to the suit cannot act contrary to the judgment and decree passed by the competent civil court. In the instant case, the grievance of the petitioner is that, the unofficial respondents i.e. Respondent Nos.5 & 6/defendants in the suit are trying to alienate land of an extent of Ac.3-34 cents in R.S.No.533 situated in Chennuru Village, Pedana Mandal, Krishna District, in favour of third parties, even though they suffered decree. It appears that the said grievance is only an apprehension of the petitioner. Assuming for a moment that the Respondent Nos.5 & 6/defendants in the suit have alienated the subject property, but the 4 NV,J W.P.No.8455 of 2025 rights of the purchaser(s) are always subject to the decree and judgment dated 14.10.2024 passed by the Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Machilipatnam in O.S.No.35 of 2024. Therefore, there is no proper cause of action in the present writ petition and it is only apprehension on the part of the petitioner. This Court once again reiterates that once the suit is decreed in favour of the petitioner and against the unofficial respondents/defendants in the suit in respect of the subject property, the parties to the suit are not allowed to act contrary to the terms of the decree, if any parties acted contrary to the terms of decree, neither of the parties to the document executed between them contrary to the decree would get any legal enforceable rights and such deed is only void document and non-est in eye of law. Therefore, the prayer sought by the petitioner is contrary to the settled proposition of law. 6. In the result, writ petition is dismissed. No costs. 7. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner, requested this Court to permit the petitioner to submit application/representation along with copy of decree and judgment dated 14.10.2024 passed by the Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Machilipatnam in O.S.No.35 of 2024 to the fourth respondent, for enforceability of the decree and judgment of the Court below. 8. Permission is accorded, permitting the petitioner to permit the petitioner to submit application/representation along with copy of decree and judgment dated 14.10.2024 passed by the Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Machilipatnam in O.S.No.35 of 2024 to the fourth respondent, for 5 NV,J W.P.No.8455 of 2025 enforceability of the decree and judgment of the Court below for appropriate action in terms of the judgment and decree 9. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand dismissed. _____________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Date:02.04.2025 SP 6 NV,J W.P.No.8455 of 2025 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 8455/2025 Date:02.04.2025 W SP