/ %■ , APHC010284142025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADE$H AT AMARAVATI BS MONDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT APPEAL NO: 758 OF 202^ Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the dated 09-04-2025 in WP.No.37129 of 2022 on the file of High Courts Between: order 1. Nara Adilakshmi, W/o. Mastan Rao Srinagar Colony, Guntur. 2. Chennupati Sambrajya Household, Srinagar Colony, Guntur. 3. Mandadi Ramanayya, S/o. N.G.O.Colony, Akkayapalem, Visakhapatnam aged 53 years. Household, W/o. Mallikarjuna Rao, Aged 72 m. years Malakondayya, aged 68 years. 4. E.Suresh Babu, S/o. Late Rajendra Prasad, aged 55 years, Lawsonbay Colony,Visakhapatnam. 5. E.Sudha Rani W/o. Suresh Babu, aged45 Lawsonbay Colony, Visakhapatnam. years. Household, 6. Tamada Gopal Rao, S/o. Late Ramana Murthy, aged Govt. Servant,Saradanagar, Anakapalli. 7. Md. Suneer, S/o. Md. Ghouse, aged 62 Street, Kurnool. 69 years. Retd. years. Business, Risaldar ...APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS 1,2 & 4 to 8 f AND - 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Stamps and Registration), Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District, AP., 2. Joint Sub-Registrar, Madhurawada Visakhapatnam Dist. 3. Visakhapatnam Metropolitan Region Development Authority(VMRDA ), Rep. by its Commissioner and Vice-Chairman, O/o Metropolitan Region Development Authority, VMRDA, Visakhapatnam. ...RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS - 4. Manikonda China Kondayya, S/o Narayya, aged 62 yrs., N.G.O.Colony, Akkayapalem, Visakhapatnam. (Died) ...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER No.3 Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI M. RAMMOHAN ^ Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2:GP FOR STAMPS AND'' REGISTRATION Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI SOMISETTY GANESH FOR VUDA AND MUDA BABU, SC Counsel for the Respondent No.4:— The Court made the following: JUDGMENT APHC010284142025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3541] MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT APPEAL NO: 758/2025 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent above named appellants beg to present this Memorandum of Writ Appeal against the order dated 09-04-2025 in WP.No.37129/2022 passed by learned Single Judge Between: 1.NARA ADILAKSHMI,, W/0. MASTAN RAO, AGED 53 YEARS, HOUSEHOLD, SRINAGAR COLONY, GUNTUR. 2.CHENNUPATI SAMBRAJYAM,, W/0. MALLIKARJUNA RAO, AGED 72 YEARS. HOUSEHOLD, SRINAGAR COLONY, GUNTUR. 3.MANOADI RAMANAYYA,, S/0. MALAKONDAYYA, AGED 68 YEARS, N.G.O.COLONY, AKKAYAPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM. 4.E.SURESH BABU,, S/0. LATE RAJENDRA PRASAD, AGED 55 YEARS, LAWSONBAY COLONY,VISAKHAPATNAM. 5.E.SUDHA RANI,, W/0. SURESH BABU, AGED 45 YEARS. HOUSEHOLD, LAWSONBAY COLONY, VISAKHAPATNAM. 6.TAMADA GOPAL RAO,, S/0. LATE RAMANA MURTHY, AGED 69 YEARS. RETD. GOVT. SERVANT,SARADANAGAR, ANAKAPALLI. 7.MD. SUNEER,, S/0. MD. GHOUSE, AGED 62 YEARS. BUSINESS, RISALDAR STREET, KURNOOL. ...APPELLANT(S) AND .9 2 RRR, J&JS,J W.A.No. 758 of 2025 BY ITS PRINCIPAL and REGISTRATION), REP. estate of ANDHRA PRADESH, SECRETARY, VELAGAPUDl, AMARAVATl, GUNTUR DISTRICT, AP revenue (STAMPS SUBREGISTRAR, MADHURAWADA VISAKHAPATNAM DIST. REGION DEVELOPMENT 2.JOINT 0/0 METROPOLITAN CHAIRMAN. AUTHORITY, VMRDA, VISAKHAPATNAM. 4.MANIK0NDA CHINA KONDAYYA, S/0 ^ARAYYA AGED 62 YRS., N.G.O.COLONY, AKKAYAPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM. (DIED) ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Appellant(S): 1.M RAMMOHAN Counsel for the Respondent(S); SOMISETTY GANESH BABU SC For VUDA and MUDA 2.GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS 1. 3 RRR, J&JS,J W.A.No.758of2025 The Court made the following Judgment: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Heard Sri M. Rammohan, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Somisetty Ganesh Babu, learned counsel for the private respondent and the learned Government Pleader for Registration and Stamps, appearing for the official respondents. 2. The appellants herein had purchased certain plots in layouts bearing L.P.No.16/2011 in Madhurawada Village and L.P.No.36/2009 Rushikonda Village of Visakhapatnam District. These deeds of sale presented for registration. However, the 2"^^ respondent. Joint Sub-Registrar, refused to receive the documents and register the same, on the ground that the 3'^^ respondent had addressed a letter, dated 12.04.2012, to the 2"^ respondent, not to register these deeds of conveyance in as much as a vigilance enquiry is pending against the allotment and sale of these plots. in were 3. The appellants, being aggrieved by the said refusal to register, had approached this Court, by way of W.P.No.37129 of 2022, with the following prayer: “... to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus to declare the endorsement Proceedings of the 2^^ respondent dt.28.10.2022 intimating ban on registration of house site plots situated in Sy.No.34 & 35 of Rushikonda Village covered by L.P.No.36/2009 and Sy.No.370 & 371 of Madhurawada Village covered by L.P.No. 16/2011 basing on a letter addressed to it by the 3 rd 4 RRR, J&JS,J W.A.No.758 of 2025'''' respondent in Rc. No. 5973/09/1-1/Dt. 12.04.2012, as arbitrary, illegal and consequently direct the 2”^ respondent to process the conveyance deeds of the Petitioners house sites for registration without reference to the impugned letter dt.12.04.2012 as and when presented to it, and pass such other order or orders...” 4. A learned Single Judge of this Court, by an order, dated 09.04.2025, had allowed the Writ Petition, following an earlier order passed in W.P.No.23217 of 2012, dated 12.12.2012, in the following manner: “In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2"^^ respondent to receive the documents that may be presented by the petitioners in respect of subject properties and to register the same after complying with the provisions of Registration Act, 1908 and Indian Stamp Act, 1899. It is made clear that, mere registration of documents would not absolve the liability of the petitioners and their successors-in-interest from the future litigation if any, including the result of the suits that were filed by the 3'"^ respondent. ” The appellants have approached this Court, by way of the present Writ Appeal, on the ground that the learned Single Judge ought to have set aside the letter, dated 12.04.2012, in as much as the same was the basis for refusal of the 2^^^ respondent and in any event, the said letter was arbitrary and requires to be set aside. 5. I 5 RRR, J&JS,J W.A.No.758of2025 6. A perusal of the prayer in the Writ Petition would show that no relief in the nature of setting aside the letter, dated 12.04.2012, had been sought. In the absence of such a prayer, it cannot be held that the learned Single Judge was required to go into the issue of whether the letter, dated 12.04.2012 is valid or not. In the circumstances, we do not find any merit in this Writ Appeal and it is accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 7. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- M.RAMESH BABU DEPUTY. REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. One CC to Sri M. Rammohan, Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to Sri Somisetty Ganesh Babu, SC for VUDA and MUDA [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to GP for Stamps and Registration, High Court of Andhra.^ Pradesh [OUT] 4. Two CD Copies. ssb 4 HIGH COURT DATED:07/07/2025 JUDGMENT WA No.758 OF 2025 ^3IJUL 2025 , DISMISSING THE W.A. WITHOUT COSTS