APHC010705782025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: BETWEEN: 1. PENBADI TRINATH REDDY, S/o. LATE P. MADHU SUDHAN REDDY, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/o. BLOCK L SERENE PARK, MASJID BANDA, KONDAPUR, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA- 500084. 2. PENUBADI HARSHAVARDHAN REDDY, S/o. LATE P. MADHU SUDHAN REDDY, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/o. FLAT No. 301, TEJA DELUX APARTMENT, GIPSON COLONY, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, STAMPS AND REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL 518001 3. THE SUB REGISTRAR, KALLUR, KURNOOL DISTRICT 4. THE AP STATE WAKF BOARD, REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRI 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 action of IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 36543/2025 PENBADI TRINATH REDDY, S/o. LATE P. MADHU SUDHAN REDDY, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/o. BLOCK L-1201, APARNA SERENE PARK, MASJID BANDA, KONDAPUR, HYDERABAD, 500084. PENUBADI HARSHAVARDHAN REDDY, S/o. LATE P. MADHU REDDY, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/o. FLAT No. 301, TEJA DELUX APARTMENT, GIPSON COLONY, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT- 518001. ...PETITIONER(S) AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, STAMPS AND REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522238 THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL THE SUB REGISTRAR, KALLUR, KURNOOL DISTRICT THE AP STATE WAKF BOARD, REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT-520001 ...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 issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3330] MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO PENBADI TRINATH REDDY, S/o. LATE P. MADHU SUDHAN 1201, APARNA SERENE PARK, MASJID BANDA, KONDAPUR, HYDERABAD, PENUBADI HARSHAVARDHAN REDDY, S/o. LATE P. MADHU REDDY, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/o. FLAT No. 301, TEJA DELUX APARTMENT, GIPSON COLONY, KURNOOL, ...PETITIONER(S) THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, STAMPS AND REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT, 522238 THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL- THE SUB REGISTRAR, KALLUR, KURNOOL DISTRICT-518002 THE AP STATE WAKF BOARD, REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE ...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 issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 2 3rd respondent in refusing to entertain the documents presented by the petitioners in respect of the Plot No. 17 admeasuring 266.66 Sq.Yards in Sy.Nos.320/ 1 of Kallur Village and mandal, Kurnool District (now 76th ward of Kurnool City) by relying upon the impugned letter/order of the 4th respondent in F.No. 01/Prot/AP/Genl/2016, dated 16.11.2016 though 4th respondent claim was dismissed in O.S No. 27/1969 by the Addl. Subordinate Judge, Kurnool by judgment and decree dated 26.02.1970 and orders of the Honble High Court in W.P No. 10631/1992, dated 28.12.1992 and number of subsequent orders of the Honble High Court in W.P No. 9228/2013, dated 28.03.2013, latest orders in W.P No. 1340/2020, dated 05.01.2021 and W.A.No.1013/2023 and batch Dt.23- 07-2025, as being illegal, arbitrary and consequently set aside the aforesaid impugned letter of the 4th respondent in so far as petitioner land is concerned with a further direction to the 3rd respondent to forthwith receive the documents presented by the petitioner and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. K RATHANGA PANI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS 2. SHAIK KHAJA BASHA The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not entertaining the registration basing upon the Memo F.No.01/Prot/AP/Genl/2016, dated 16.11.2016 and consequently prayed to direct the respondents to receive, register and release the sale deed presented for registration. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners’ mother is the owner of Plot No.17, admeasuring 266.66 sq. yards in Sy.Nos.320/1 of Parimala Nagar, Kallur village and mandal, Kurnool District, which was purchased by way of registered sale deed No.1813/2014, dated 29.03.2014, ever since, the petitioners are in possession and enjoyment of the same. In order to meet the family necessities, the petitioners agreed to sell the plot to the intended purchasers, the 4th respondent refused to receive and register the same basing upon the aforesaid memo dated 16.11.2016 and the subject memo was the subject matter of the Writ Petition in W.P. No.10631 of 1992 and the said Writ Petition was allowed and memo was set aside by the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh vide order dated 28.12.1992 and also further stated that the land in Sy.No.320 is subject matter in the Suit O.S. No.27/1969, filed suit for recovery of possession and the said suit was dismissed by the Additional Subordinate Judge, filed by the Wakf Board. Subsequent to the dismissal of the suit, number of writ petitions 4 has been filed before this Court and the said writ petitions were allowed and the registrations were done. Therefore not entertaining the sale deeds presented by the petitioners amounts to violation of principles of natural justice and hence, prayed to direct the respondents to receive and register the documents. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent draws the attention of the Court to the judgment in O.S. No.27 of 1969 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Kurnool and would submit that as per the findings of the judgment in O.S. No.27/1969, the property is Wakf property and the said contention has not been raised in the earlier writ petition and also stated that either vendor of the writ petitioners or writ petitioners are not the parties to the suit O.S. No.27 of 1969 and it is settled proposition of law that the Judgment in the suit is binding only to the parties to the suit, either the petitioner or the vendors of the petitioner are not the parties to the suit. Therefore, this judgment is not binding to the petitioner. Hence, prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition. 4. The Suit in O.S. No.27 of 1969 was dismissed on the ground that the suit barred by limitation, the possession of the defendants cannot be disturbed. 5. In reply to the argument raised by the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent, the petitioners rely on the order in W.A. No.1013 of 2023 and batch. 5 The Division Bench of this Court held that when the suit itself barred by limitation would mean that the land in question cannot be recovered by the Wakf Board. In the absence of such ability to recover the land, the question of keeping the land in such a limbo wherein persons can remain in occupation but cannot transfer the land would only give rise to further complications. Even otherwise, the order of the civil Court in O.S. No.27 of 1969 bars the Wakf Board from making any claim over the land. 6. The suit filed by Waqf Board for relief of declaration, for the survey Nos.120, 208, 313, 316, 317, 320 and 517 was dismissed on the ground, the suit barred by limitation. When the Waqf Board cannot enforce the judicial process by means of suit, as no right of remedy under Section 27 of the Limitation Act subsists. The Waqf Board has extinguished the right to such property. Hence, the contention that the judgment is binding only to the parties to the Suit, is appear to be not sound and this Court as well as erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh passed several orders, directing the respondents herein to receive and register the documents, pertaining to very subject matter of property. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the Revenue Department would submit that the petitioner has not presented any document, if at all the petitioner had submitted document, the Sub Registrar Office will issue pending registration number, without submitting the document, the petitioner cannot seek a relief to register the document. 6 8. This Court has disposed of W.P. No.14331 of 2020 relying on the orders of composite High Court in W.P. No.12313 of 2013, directed the respondents in the event the documents presented for registration is found to fulfill the requirements of the Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act,1899, the Sub-Registrar/3rd respondent shall complete the registration formalities and release the documents in accordance with law. 9. The suit order was under challenge in batch of writ appeals in W.A. No.1013 of 2023 and batch, the order of this Court in W.P. No.14331 of 2020 has been upheld by the Division Bench. Therefore, the present Writ Petition is disposed of directing the writ petitioners to present the document to the concerned Sub Registrar Office fulfilling the requirements of the Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, thereafter the Sub Registrar shall complete the registration formalities and release the documents in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 23.02.2026 Harin 7 33 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO W.P.No. 36543 OF 2025 Date: 23-02-2026 Harin 8 HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI MAIN CASE: W.P. No. 36543 of 2025 PROCEEDING SHEET Sl. No DATE ORDER Office Note 7. 17.02.2026 TRR, J The Writ Petition is disposed of. [vide separate order] _______ TRR,J Harin