APHC010383282025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 19673/2025 Between: 1. SUNDARA MARY BAI, AGE, 77YRS W/O NIMIDITALLISAMUEL, R/OD.NO.9-3-74/1, ASWARARAOPETA ROAD, JANGAREDDYGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2. NIMIDITALLI ANIL KUMAR,, AGE 54YRS S/O SAMUEL @ SANYASI, R/O D.NO.9-3-74,JABILLI MOTHER AND CHILD HOSPITAL, JANGAREDDYGUDEM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, JANGAREDDYGUDEM WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRI.SECRETARY, STAMPS AND REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, ELURU DISTRICT, ELURU 3. THE SUBREGISTRAR, KAMAVARAPUKOTA SUB-REGISTRAR OFFICE KAMAVARAPUKOTA 4. NUNNA JAGAN PRASAD, AGE 41YRS, S/O SRINIVASA RAJU, R/O D.NO.15-20, KAMAVARAPUKOTA, CHITALAPUDI JCJC, KAMAVARAPUKOTA MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...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 topleased to issue order direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ Of Mandamus declare the action of the respondents in not taking the action on the complaint made by the petitioners on 11/07/2025 to transfer the lands covered in R.S.No.649/4 and R.S.No.649/5 an extent of Ac.1.56 Cents 2 and Ac.2.44 Cents to prohibitory list till the fulfillment of the payment to be made by the 4th respondent as per the Judgement in O.S.No.58/2018 and O.S.No.38/2020 by The II Additional District Judge, Eluru on 22/03/2025 and to pass IA NO: 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 pleased to direct the respondents to take action on the complaint made by the petitioners on 11/07/2025 by transfering the property in R.S.No.649/4 and R.S.No.649/5 an extent of Ac. 1.56 Cents and Ac.2.44 Cents to prohibitory list till the Payment made by the 4th respondent as per the Judgement in O.S.No.58/2018 & O.S.No.38/2020 by The II Additional District Judge, Eluru on 22/03/2025 pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. J RAVI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS The Court made the following: ::ORDER:: Heard Sri J.Ravi Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri B.V.Satyanaryana, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents 1 to 3. 2. Notice in respect of respondent No.4 is dispensed with since no adverse order is passed affecting his right of interest. 3. Petitioner No.1 filed suit in O.S.No.58 of 2018 against respondent No.4, seeking specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 20.04.2017, alternatively for refund of Rs.2,25,00,000/- with subsequent interest @ 24% per annum. The Civil Court by judgment dated 22.03.2025, decreed the suit in part, granting an alternative remedy to refund the earnest money of Rs.65,00,000/- with interest @ 12% per annum. The respondent No.4 herein filed suit O.S.No.38 of 2020 against the petitioners seeking a perpetual injunction. The said suit was decreed restraining the petitioners from 3 interfering with the possession and enjoyment of scheduled property subject to refund of earnest money of Rs.65,00,000/- as per the judgment in O.S.No.58 of 2018 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Eluru. A common judgment was passed by the Civil Court on 22.03.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that despite the judgment/decree in O.S.No.58 of 2018, the respondent No.4, without complying with the decree, intends to alienate the scheduled property. The petitioner made a representation to the respondent No.3, dated 10.07.2025, not to entertain any documents concerning Ac.4.00 cents in Sy.Nos.649/4 and 649/5, Kamavarapukota Village. Learned counsel would submit that the respondent No.3 has not passed any order. Hence, the writ petition. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions, would submit that unless a restraint order is passed by a competent Civil Court or the properties are included in the list of prohibited properties under Section 22-A of Registration Act, 1908, the registering authority, whenever a document is presented, shall receive and process the documents. He would also submit that the petitioner, instead of filing an execution petition, in pursuance of judgment/decree, made a representation to the respondent No.3 and the same is impermissible. 6. Thus, as seen from common judgment dated 22.03.2025, in O.S.No.58 of 2018, the suit filed by the petitioner No.1 against the respondent No.4 seeking specific performance of agreement of sale dated 20.04.2017 or for refund of amount with interest, the suit was decreed in part, granting alternative relief and refund of earnest money of Rs.65,00,000/- with interest @ 12% per annum. In the suit in O.S.No.38 of 2020 against the petitioners herein, the Civil Court granted an injunction subject to payment of the amount as per the judgment in O.S.No.58 of 2018. As seen from the judgment, no charge is created by the Civil Court under Section 100 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. 4 7. As rightly pointed out by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the registered authority, as per the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and the Rules made thereunder, will not receive and process the document, if the property is included in the list of prohibited property list of the Registration Act, 1908 or restraint order passed by a competent Civil Court. 8. In the case at hand, neither a restraint order was passed by the Civil Court nor were the properties included in the list of prohibited properties. 9. The grievance of the petitioner that the respondent No.3 has not passed any order on the representation dated 10.07.2025, in the considered opinion of this Court, is misconceived. This Court do not find any merits. 10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, this order will not preclude the petitioner from approaching the proper forum. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 31.07.2025 SCS 5 226 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 19673/2025 Date: 31.07.2025 SCS