Date of reserved for orders : - Date of pronouncement : 30.06.2026 Date of uploading : 08.07.2026 APHC010236412026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] Tuesday, the 30th day of June, 2026 Present The Honourable Ms. Justice B. S. Bhanumathi Writ Petition No: 12368 of 2026 Between: Upputholla Narayana and others ...Petitioners and The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: 1. M. Kishore Babu Counsel for the respondents: 1. G.P. for Registration and Stamps The Court made the following: 2 BSB,J W.P.No.12368 of 2026 ORDER: The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “…to issue an order or orders, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondent No. 3 for registering the petitioners’ partition deed, dated 10.04.2026, in an extent of Ac. 0.30 cents, in survey No. 246/A1 (previously R.S. No. 246/A), of Nallapadu Village, Guntur West Mandal, Guntur District, A.P., as illegal, arbitrary, biased, un-constitutional against the principles of natural justice, and against the Rules of the Registration and Stamps Act and consequently direct the respondents Nos. 2 to 3 to register the petitioners’ partition deed, dated 10.04.2026 after paying the requisite fee, which is applicable, and to pass…” 2. The case of the petitioners is, stated briefly, as follows: The petitioner No. 1 is the son and petitioner No. 2 is the daughter of late Upputholla Venkateswarlu. The petitioner No. 2 filed O.S. No. 142 of 2025 on the file of the Court of I Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Guntur, for partition of land admeasuring Ac. 0.30 cents, in survey No. 246/A1 (previously R.S. No. 246/A), of Nallapadu Village, Guntur West Mandal, Guntur District. The matter was settled between the petitioners vide Lok Adalat award dated 13.12.2025. Thereafter, the petitioners approached the respondent No. 3 for execution of the partition deed dated 10.04.2026 regarding the subject property. The respondent No. 3 rejected the same without giving any proper reasons. Hence, this writ petition was filed. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that as per the decision of the High Court of Madras in K.C.Shanmugham Vs. The 3 BSB,J W.P.No.12368 of 2026 District Registrar and another in W.P. No. 5871 of 2022, dated 16.03.2022, the Registrar cannot refuse to register the decree on the ground that it is presented beyond the period prescribed under Section 23 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908. 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration submitted that the Registrar concerned will pass speaking order as required under Section 71 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908 in case the registration is refused for any valid reason. 5. In view of the submissions on both the sides, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent No. 3, in case the registration is refused, to pass a speaking order as required under Section 71 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, within two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE B.S. BHANUMATHI Dated: 30.06.2026 NSM Whether the order is: Speaking Reasoned Reportable Non-reportable 4 BSB,J W.P.No.12368 of 2026 82 The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Writ Petition No: 12368 of 2026 Dated: 30.06.2026 NSM