::1:: APHC010234092025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11609/2025 Between: Karlapudi Sri Hari ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. RAM BABU DEVAVARAPU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS ::2:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11609/2025 This Court made the following ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. With their consent, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. 2. The Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the 3rd respondent in refusing to register the sale transaction in respect of petitioner‟s land comprising of RCC Building and vacant space admeasuring 158.88 square yards out of total extent of Ac.3.83 cents in Door No.10-323, in Sy.No.14/1, situated at Tirupathi District, Sullurpeta Village, Sullurpeta Municipality, though the same is not in prohibited list, on the ground that the subject matter land is showing in „Notional Khata‟ and the pattadar name is also not tallied as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Rules, 1989 and for a consequential direction to the 3rd respondent to entertain registration in respect of the subject matter land. ::3:: 3. Referring to the averments made in the Writ Petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner‟s vendor Sri Kasimala Narasaya, resident of Church Compound, Rapur Town, Nellore District along with one Sri Polamreddy Kishore Kumar jointly purchased the subject property on 03.09.2012 from the South Andhra Lutheran Church, through its Board of Trustees. The said transaction was duly registered before the Sub-Registrar, Sulurpet. Ever since the date of purchase, the said purchasers have been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property. He further submits that Sri Kasimala Narasaya expressed his intention to sell his share of subject property to the Petitioner and when the petitioner approached the 3rd respondent for registration of Sale Deed, the 3rd respondent refused to entertain registration in respect of the subject land on the ground that the same is shown under „Notional Khata‟ in the revenue records by the revenue officials and that the pattadar name does not tally with the revenue records. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner, further submits that the 3rd respondent is the statutory authority and under the provisions of the Stamps & Registration Act, 1908(for short „the Act‟), he is empowered to refuse the registration, if the lands falls in any of the categories specified under clauses (A to D) of Section 22-A of the Act. He submits that the ::4:: land in question does not fall in any of the clauses under Section 22-A of the Act and that it is not included in the prohibited category list. As such, it is not open to the 3rd respondent to refuse the registration on the ground the land is shown in „notional katha‟. He also contends that mere mentioning in „Notional Khata‟ does not affect the right of the pattadar to sell the property and the same cannot be taken as basis to refuse registration. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Rule 26(3) of A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as Rules, 1989) contemplates that obtaining pattadar passbooks and title deeds is not compulsory for the pattadars and owners. Further that the registering authority shall not insist for production of title deed-cum-pattadar passbook for any transaction in respect of the land. He accordingly urges for granting the relief as prayed for. 5. On a due consideration of matter, this Court finds force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to Rule 26(3) of the Rules, 1989 which reads thus: “Rule 26 (3): It shall not be compulsory for the pattadar and owners to obtain title deed-cum-pattadar pass books. It will be optional as per discretion of the Pattadar/Owner. The Registration authority under the Registration Act, 1908 shall not insist for production of title deed-cum-pattadar pass book for any transaction in respect of the land. Similarly, no credit agency ::5:: shall insist for production of title deed-cum-pattadar pass book for the purpose of sanction or discharge of loan.” 6. A reading of the Rule extracted above makes it clear that obtaining pattadar pass books and title deeds is optional and the Registration authority shall not insist for production of the same. In view of the undisputed Rule position, there is no justification for not registering the document on the ground of that the land is shown under „Notiional Khata‟. 7. Therefore, this Court is inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition with a direction to the 3rd respondent to register the document in respect of the subject matter land, if the same is otherwise in compliance with the provisions of the Act, in the light of Rule 26(3) of the Rules, 1989, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Dt: 01.05.2025 krk ::6:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 53 WRIT PETITION NO:11609 of 2025 01.05.2025 krk