//
you're reading...
CHEQUE BOUNS CASE

(a) in case the document presented by the petitioner was registered by the time the 4th respondent has received the copy of the order in I.A.No.495 of 2011 in O.S.No.141 of 2011, he shall release the same in favour of the petitioners; (b) if on the other hand, the document was kept pending registration and in the meanwhile, the 4th respondent received the order from the civil Court, he shall not be under obligation to release it; and (c) in such an event, the petitioners shall be entitled to seek modification or vacation of the order passed by the trial Court and the nature of steps to be taken by the 4th respondent would depend upon the outcome of the I.As. The miscellaneous petition filed in this writ petition also stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

THE HON’BLESRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY

"Court Trial of Witches", illustrato...

“Court Trial of Witches”, illustrator unknown (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Writ Petition No.764 of 2012

ORDER:

 

The petitioners presented a deed of partition dated 03.06.2011 for registration before the Sub-Registrar, Koritapadu, 4th respondent herein.  It was assigned P.No.67/11 and kept pending.  The 4th respondent however did not release the document and proceeded further on the ground that an order of temporary injunction was passed by the Court IV Additional District Judge, Guntur on 09.06.2011 in I.A.No.495 of 2011 in O.S.No.141 of 2011. The petitioners contend that the document was executed and in fact registered much before the trial Court passed the order and that there is no justification for the 4th respondent in not releasing the document.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Revenue and the Sri S.Raj Kumar, learned counsel for the 5th respondent.

In case, the 4th respondent received any prohibitory order from the trial Court disabling him from registering the document, he cannot be compelled to register the document in contravention of the said order.  However, if the document was registered, by the time the order of civil Court was received, he would be under obligation to release it and such an act would not amount to any contravention. Much would depend upon the nature of steps that have taken place in the office of the 4th respondent vis-à-vis the document.

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing that

(a)                in case the document presented by the petitioner was registered by the time the 4th respondent has received the copy of the order in I.A.No.495 of 2011 in O.S.No.141 of 2011, he shall release the same in favour of the petitioners;

(b)                if on the other hand, the document was kept pending registration and in the meanwhile, the 4th respondent received the order from the civil Court, he shall not be under obligation to release it; and

(c)                in such an event, the petitioners shall be entitled to seek modification or vacation of the order passed by the trial Court and the nature of steps to be taken by the 4th respondent would depend upon the outcome of the I.As.

The miscellaneous petition filed in this writ petition also stands disposed of.  There shall be no order as to costs.

 

____________________
L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J

Date: 28.03.2012

KO/JSU


THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY

 

 

Writ Petition No.764 of 2012

 

 

 

 

Date: 28.03.2012

KO/JSU

 

Advertisements

About advocatemmmohan

ADVOCATE

Discussion

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: