IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 14308 OF 2024 Between: 1. Shaikh Hamida, W/o.Mohd. Abdul Rasheed, Indian, aged about 34 years, R/o.D.No.l-l52l/A, Kondametti Water Tank, Srikalahasti Town and Post ,Tirupathi District. Shaikha Mohd. Abdul Rasheed, S/o.Khader Basha, Indian, aged about 41 years, R/o. R/o.D.No.1-1521/A, Kondametti Water Tank, Srikalahasti Town and Post, Tirupathi District. 2. ...PETITIONERS AND 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Commissioner and IG of Stamps and Registration, A.P.Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. Sub-Registrar, Pullampeta Sub-Registrar Office, Pullampeta, YSR Kadapa District, Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENTS 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 appropriate, Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned Refusal Order No.06/2023 dated 08-09-2023 and impugned Refusal Order Nb'.28/2022 dated 15-12-2022 of the Petitioners respectively for registration of property in respect of residential plots in Sy.No.1630/N1, 1631/N1 and 1632/N1 as illegal, null and void and further direct the Respondent No.2 to receive and register the Sale Deeds executed in favour of the Petitioners kept as dated 26-08-2023 and 23-11-2022 respectively. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 2nd Respondent to receive, register and release the Sale Deeds of the Petitioners in P.No.28/2023 29.08.2023 dated and P. No.97/2022 14.12.2022 dated in favour of the Petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI. PRASAAD LAW OFFICES LLP Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS The Court made the following: APHC010284702024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 14308/2024 Between: Shaikh Hamida and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. PRASAAD LAW OFFICES LLP Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “to issue an appropriate, Writ, Orderor Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned Refusal Order No. 06/2023 dated 08-09-2023 and impugned Refusal Order No. 28/2022 dated 15-12-2022 of the Petitioners respectively for registration of property in A- f respect of residential plots in Sy.No.1630/N1, 1631/N1 and 1632/N1 as illegal, null and void and further direct the Respondent No. 2 to receive and register the Sale Deeds executed in favour of the Petitioners kept as dated 26-08- 2023 and 23-11-2022 respectively and to pass such other order or orders...” 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents. The present writ petition is filed challenging the proceedings in Progs. No. Refusal No. 06/2023, dated 08.09.2023, and the impugned Refusal No. 28/2022, dated 15.12.2022, issued by the 2nd respondent, whereby registration of the sale deeds dated 26.08.2023 and 23.11.2022, executed in favour of the petitioners by their vendors, were refused. The refusal is based on the ground that the subject property is covered by stay orders issued by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in CRMP No. 1546 of 2012 in CRP No. 1147 of 2012. 2. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that neither the petitioner nor their vendors are party to the CRP No.1147 of 2012 on the file of this court and therefore the orders passed in the said Revision does not bind them and hence the ground on which the registering authority refused to register the document is untenable. Accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, justified the action of the registering authority in refusing to register the documents. It is well established principle of that an order of injunction passed in a suit would operate only against the parties to it. A co-ordinate bench of 5. this court in W.P.No.11560 of 2011 held as follows:- “An order of injunction passed in a suit would operate only against the parties to it. Howsoever, proximate or remote, a person may be connected to a party to proceedings before a Court, an order passed therein does not bind him, unless he is a party thereto” 6. It is specific contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that Co-ordinate bench of this court in Writ Petition Nos.9139 of 2012 and 16921 of 2014 vide orders dated 02.04.2012 and 20.06.2014, while placing reliance on the orders in W.P.No. 11560 of 2011, allowed the similar writ petition directing the registering authorities to process the document in accordance with law, in case the petitioners or their vendors are not parties to the order in CRP No. 1147 of 2012. The issue involved in this case is squarely covered by the orders passed in the writ petition Nos.9139 of 2012 and 16921 of 2014 and hence similar orders passed therein can be passed in this writ petition. 7. In the above view of the matter, in view of the orders passed in writ petition Nos.9139 of 2012 and 16921 of 2014, this writ petition is disposed C* ‘ of by directing the Registering authorities to find out whetherthe petitioners or their vendors are parties to the order in CRP No.1147 of 2012 and in case if they are not parties, the Registering authority shall process the document in accordance with law and release the same to the petitioners, within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order. It is also made clear that the registration so made shall not affect the rights of the parties to the revision nor shall it create rights in favour of any person except the parties to the document. 8. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. SD/-S.V.S.R.MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR (5" %r //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Commissioner and IG of Stamps and Registration, State of Andhra Pradesh, A.P.Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Sub-Registrar, Pullampeta Sub-Registrar office, Pullampeta, YSR Kadapa District, Andhra Pradesh 3. OneCCto SRI. PRASAAD LAW OFFICES LLP, Advocate [OPUC] GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS ,High Court Of 4. Two CCs to Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 5. Three CD Copies HIGH COURT DATED:24/04/2025 ORDER WP.No.14308 of 2024 ^ 21 MAY 2025 ^ Current Section "^^esPATCHlS/ DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS