Ravindranath SLP

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

I.A. NO. OF 2017
IN
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF:
Vemani Ravindranath and Ors. Petitioners

Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. Respondents
AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY
To
The Hon’ble Chief Justice and
His Companion Justice of Supreme
Court of India
The Honor Petition of the Petitioners above named most

respectfullyShoweth:
1. The present Petition is filed seeking Special Leave to writ
petition against the common impugned Judgment and order
dated 23.12.2015 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of
Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana for the
State of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Appeal No. 343 of 2015. The
High Court by its Impugned judgment disposed all the writ
petitions of petitioner herein along with other connected

matters on the basis of ratio laid down by Full Bench of High
Court in WA No.343/2015 and batch dated 23.12.2015.
2 That petitioner reiterated the contents of SLP and for the
sake of brevity the same are not repeated herein.
3 That the impugned order passed by Hon’ble High Court
on 29.1.2016 and the same was informed to petitioner by the
Advocate in High Court but the petitioner herein could not raise
the funds to file the present SLP before this Hon’ble Court and
that they were not party before the High Court of Judicature at
Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh.
4 That due to above stated reasons some delay has
occasioned which is neither deliberate nor intentional but
occurred due to above stated bonafide reasons.
PRAYER
For the reasons stated above it is humbly prayed that this
Hon’ble Court may be pleased to
a. condone the delay of ____ days in filing the present SLP
against the common impugned Judgment and order dated
23.12.2015 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at
Hyderabad for the State of Telangana for the State of Andhra
Pradesh in Writ Appeal No. 343 of 2015; and

ii) pass any other order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit
and proper in the interest of justice.
AND FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS YOUR PETITIONERS, AS

IN DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY.
FILED BY:
SUMANTH NOOKALA
ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONERS
Filed on : 02.05.2017
Place-New Delhi
SUMANTH NOOKALA
ADVOCATE
105, OLD LAYERS CHAMBER
SUPREME COURT
NEW DELHI
LETTER FOR URGENCY
Date: 02.05.2017
To
The Registrar
Supreme Court of India
New Delhi
Sub: SLP ( C ) No. of 2016, D. No. of 2016

Vemani Ravindranath and Ors.
Versus
State of A.P and Ors.
Sir,
It is submitted that in the above stated matter lands which
are involved are the ancestor properties of the vendors of the
petitioner herein, this Hon’ble Court categorically held in a catena of
judgments that a list sent by Tahsildar or the District
Collector/Revenue Authority showing certain properties belong to
the Government does not have any binding force in refusing to
register. The registering authority shall apply its mind to the
material placed by the private party as well as revenue officials and
arrive at own conclusion. Simply because included the particular
survey number in the list of Government land cannot take away the
rights of the owners of the property. The registering authority ought
to have register the lands basing on the material produced by the
parties concern. Without application of mind, the registering
authority cannot refuse to register without assigning any reason.
It is submitted that this Hon’ble Court, against the orders in
Writ Appeal No. 343/2015 dated 23.12.2015 granted interim
directions and directed to post along with the connected SLP ( c )
No. 15009/2016 on 26.09.2016.
Hence there is an urgency to register/list the above stated
matter.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully
SUMANTH NOOKALA
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
I.A. NO. OF 2017
IN
IN THE MATTER OF:
Vemani Ravindranath & Ors. Petitioners

Versus
State of AP and ors Respondents
AN APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED

COPY OF IMPUGNED ORDER
To
Court of India
The Honor Petition of the

Petitioners above named
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
petition against the common impugned Judgment and
order dated 23.12.2015 passed by the Hon’ble High Court
of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana
and for the State of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Appeal No.
343 of 2015. The High Court by its Impugned judgment

disposed all the writ petitions herein along with other
connected matters on the basis of ratio laid down by Full
Bench of High Court in WA No.343/2015 and batch dated
23.12.2015.
3. It is submitted that against the orders of the Hon’ble High
Court at Hyderabad has passed a common Impugned
Judgment dated 23.12.2015 and the Petitioner Counsel
has filed the Common Impugned Certified copy of
Judgment in the main matter being SLP (C ) 15009 of
2016 and the Petitioners are not party before the Hon’ble
Court Hence, they could not get the Certified copy in Writ
Petition No. 343 of 2015.
PRAYER
a. exempt the petitioners from filing certified copy of the
Impugned common Judgment and order dated
23.12.2015 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of
Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and

for the State of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Appeal No. 343 of
2015; and

FILED BY:
Sumanth Nookala
ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER
Filed on: 02.05.2017
Place-New Delhi
I.A. NO. OF 2017
IN
IN THE MATTER OF:
Kasthuri and Ors. Petitioners
Versus
T.K. Jambu and Anr. Respondents
AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SPECIAL LEAVE

PETITION
To
Court of India

order dated 09.12.2016 passed by the High Court of
Judicature at Madras in A.S. No. 533 of 2006.
3. The Petitioners are not party before the High Court and
they are affected by the Impugned final Judgment and
order dated 09.12.2016 passed by the High Court of
Judicature at Madras in A.s. No. 533 of 2006. Therefore

the Petitioners are challenging the said Impugned order
dated 9.12.2016 before this Hon’ble Court. Hence this is
an application seeking permission to file present Special
Leave Petition against the Judgment and order dated
09.12.2016 passed by the High Court of Judicature at
Madras in A.s. No. 533 of 2006
PRAYER
a. permit the petitioners to file Special Leave Petition against
the Impugned final Judgment and order dated
09.12.2016 passed by the High Court of Judicature at
Madras in A.s. No. 533 of 2006; and

FILED BY:
MRS. N. SHOBA
Filed on: 05.05.2017
Place-New Delhi
I.A. NO. OF 2017
IN
IN THE MATTER OF:

Versus
AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO BRING ON RECORD

THE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENT/ANNEXURE
To
Court of India
order dated 23.12.2015 passed by the Hon’ble High Court
of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana
and for the State of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Appeal No.
343 of 2015. The High Court by its Impugned judgment
disposed all the writ petitions herein along with other
connected matters on the basis of ratio laid down by Full

Bench of High Court in WA No.343/2015 and batch dated
23.12.2015.
3. It is submitted that against the orders of the Hon’ble High
Court at Hyderabad has passed a common Impugned
Judgment dated 23.12.2015. After that the Hon’ble
Division Bench passed similar order in Writ Petition Nos.
22960/2015, 22933/2015 and 22937/2015 and batch
dated 29.01.2016. Therefore the order dated 29.01.2016
is required to bring on record for the better adjudication
of the issues involved in the present Special Leave
Petition. A true copy of the order dated 29.01.2016
passed by the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for
the State of Telangana and State of Andhra Pradesh in
Writ Petition No. 22960/2015, 22933/2015 and
22937/2015 is annexed and marked as Annexure P9
Pages ____ to ____
PRAYER

a. exempt the petitioners from filing certified copy of the
Impugned common Judgment and order dated
23.12.2015 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of
Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and
for the State of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Appeal No. 343 of
2015; and

FILED BY:
Sumanth Nookala
Filed on: 02.05.2017
Place-New Delhi
IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ORDER XXI RULE 3 (1) (a)
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION
(Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India)
Special Leave Petition (Civil ) No of 2017
(Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India arising out of the
common impugned Judgment and Order dated 23.12.2015
passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad
for the State of Telangana and for the State of Andhra Pradesh
in Writ Appeal No. 343 of 2015)
(WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF)
IN THE MATTER OF
IN THE MATTER OF:

Versus
WITH
I.A. No. of 2017
AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION
TO FILE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION
AND
I.A. NO OF 2017
AN APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED
COPY OF IMPUGNED ORDER
AND
I.A. NO. OF 2017
AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING
AND
I.A. NO. OF 2017
AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENT/ANNEXURE
PAPER BOOK
(FOR INDEX PLEASE SEE INSIDE)
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER :SUMANTH NOOKALA

INDEX
S. NO. PARTICULARS OF DOCUMENT PAGES
1 Official Report on Limitation
2 Listing performa
3 Synopsis and List of Dates and events
4 Certified copy of the common impugned

Judgment and order dated 23.12.2015
passed by the Hon’ble High Court of
Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of
Telangana and for the State of Andhra
Pradesh in Writ Appeal No. 343 of 2015
5 Special Leave Petition with Affidavit
6 Appendix –I
Section 22A of Registration Act, 1908
7 Annexure P-1
A true copy of WP No.36711/2014 dated
16.11.2014 filed by 1st petitioner before
High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad
8 Annexure P-2
9 Annexure P-3
10. Annexure P-4

11 Annexure P-5
12. Annexure P-6

A copy of Judgment dated 1.6.2015
passed by the High Court of Judicature
at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana
and Andhra Pradesh in W.P. No. 36711
of 2014 and batch
13. Annexure P-7

22.7.2015 filed by 7th and 8th petitioner
before High Court of Judicature at
Hyderabad
14. Annexure P-8

22.7.2015 filed by 7th and 8th petitioner
before High Court of Judicature at
Hyderabad
15. Annexure P-9

A true copy of the interim order dated
12.05.2016 passed by this Hon’ble Court
in SLP ( Civil ) No. 15009 of 2016
16. I.A. No. of 2017

An Application for permission to file
Special Leave Petition
17. I.A. No. of 2017

An Application for exemption from filing
Certified copy of Impugned order.
11. I.A. No. of 2017

An Application for condonation of delay
in filing Special Leave Petition
12. I.A. No. of 2017
An Application for permission to bring on
record Additional document/ Annexure
13. Annexure P10

A true copy of the common order dated
29.01.2016 passed by the High Court of
Telangana and Andhra Pradesh in Writ
petition No. 22960/2015, 22933/2015
and 22935 of 2015 and batch
SPCIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF:

Versus
OFFICE REPORT ON LIMITATION
1. The Petition is / are within limitation.
2. The Petition is barred by time and there is delay of ___
days in fling the same against order dated 23.12.2015and
petition for condonation of delay of ________ Days has
been filed.
3. There is delay of ___ Days in refilling the petition and
petition for condonation of ____ days delay in refilling has
been filed.
Dated:
New Delhi Advocate for the Petitioner
SYNOPSIS AND LIST OF DATES
The present SLP is being filed challenging the common
impugned final Judgment and order dated 23.12.2015 passed
by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the
State of Telangana and for the State of Andhra Pradesh in Writ
Appeal No. 343 of 2015 & batch in interpreting provisions of
section 22A of Registration Act, 1908. The impugned judgment
has interpreted the provisions of section 22A in a manner to
defeat the rights of the citizen over immovable property by
authorizing preparation of lists purportedly under section 22A
(1) © of the said Act.
It is submitted that 1stpetitioner is absolute owner and
possessor of the land admeasuring 294sq yards in Sy
No.242/21, Tiruchanuru (V) TirupatiMandal, Renigunta Sub
Division, Tirupati Revenue Division, Chittoor District, Andhra
Pradesh. The petitioner wants to dispose of the property to
third party but the respondents are not entertaining the sale
deeds i.e. why seeking a direction to the respondents to
entertain the sale deed presented by the petitioner, he filed WP
No.36711/2014 before the Hon’ble High Court of at Hyderabad
for States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh.

It is submitted that 2nd petitioner is absolute owner and
possessor of the land admeasuring 294 sq yards in Sy
It is submitted that 3rd petitioner is absolute owner and

It is submitted that 4th petitioner is absolute owner and
It is submitted that 5thpetitioner is absolute owner and

The said writ petition Nos.36711/2014, 35090/2014,
36701/2014, 36693/2014 and 36584/2014 were disposed of by
the Hon’ble High Court vide common order in a batch of writ
petitions on 01.06.2015 directing the respondents to receive
sale deed presented by the petitioners and registered the same
in favor of third parties but the request of the petitioners to
receive the sale deeds and register the same is pending, in the
meantime similar issue was referred to the full bench of the
Hon’ble High Court, the Hon’ble High Court in a common
judgment in WA No.343/2015 dated 23.12.2015 passed a
common order framing certain guidelines to be followed by the
respondents during the course of registration of any document.
While things stood thus,
The 6thpetitioner is absolute owner and possessor of land
measuring 6 ½ cents in Survey No.242/21, Tiruchanuru (V),
TirupatiMandal, Renigunta Sub Division, Tirupati Revenue
Division, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner wants
to dispose of the property to third party but the respondents
are not entertaining the sale deeds that is why, seeking a
direction to the respondents to entertain the sale deed

presented by the petitioner filed said writ petition
No.22960/2015.
The 7thand 8thpetitioners are absolute owners and possessor of
land admeasuring 293 1/3 sq yards in Survey No.242/21,
Tiruchanuru (V), TirupatiMandal, Renigunta Sub Division,
Tirupati Revenue Division, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh.
The petitioner wants to dispose of the property to third party
but the respondents are not entertaining the sale deeds that is
why seeking a direction to the respondents to entertain the sale
deed presented by the petitioner,filed writ petition
No.22933/2015.
The 9th petitioner is absolute owner and possessor of land
measuring 0-03 ½ cents in Survey No.242/21, Tiruchanuru (V),
TirupatiMandal, Renigunta Sub Division, Tirupati Revenue
Division, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner wants
to dispose of the property to third party but the respondents
are not entertaining the sale deeds that is why seeking a
direction to the respondents to entertain the sale deed
presented by the petitioner, filed writ petition No.22937/2015.

It is submitted the First Respondent Government allotted the
land to the father of the Petitioner No.10 in Survey
No.285/10, extent 1 Acre 46 cents, Survey No.620/1a
extent 4 Acres 9 cents in 1970, since then the family
members of the 10th Petitioner are in possession and
enjoyment of the said property and accordingly he is the
absolute owner of the said property.
The petitioners 11 to 17 are purchased the property in
Survey No.285/5, extent 1 Acre 47 cents, Survey
No.166/3a 0.44 cents, Survey No.620/1a extent 4 Acres 90
cents, total 6 Acres 81 cents, Sy No.518/1B, extent 4.98
cents, Sy No.285/8 extent 1.47 cents, Survey No.518/1,
extent 4.50 cents total 6.17 cents., Survey No.283 1.12
cents, survey no.51811 extent 4.80 cents, survey no.96
extent 0.40 cents, Survey No.157 extent 0.93 cents,
Survey No.166/3 extent 0.44 cents total 7.04 acres.,
Survey No.285/9 extent 1.46 Acres, Survey No.285/7, 1.47
cents, Survey No.522/2 extent 0.06 cents, Survey No.541
extent 0.94 cents, Survey No.522/5 extent 0.56 cents total
1.56 acres., Survey No.604/1, extent 2.50 cents, Survey
No.605/2, extent 5 acres., Survey No.540/1 extent 2.24
cents, Survey No.361/2 extent 5 acres, Survey No.77/1,

extent 1.32 cents, Survey No.361/2 extent 5 acres., survey
no.604/1, 5 Acres, Survey No.539 extent 1.47 cents,
Survey No.540/1, extent 2.24 cents, ChinnaiahSy No.541
extent 0.94 cents, Sy No.519, extent 2.11 cents, Sy
No.522/2 extent 0.06 cents, Sy No.522/3 extent 0.66
cents, Sy No.522/4 extent 1.88 cents, Sy No.522/5 extent
0.56 cents, Sy No.522/6 extent 1.88 cents, Sy No.522/1,
extent 1.88 cents. Mandapampalli Village, Onpimitta
Revenue Division, YSR Cadappa District.
It is submitted that the Ld. Single Judge in W.P. 24587 of 2014
and batch directed to tagged on with the Writ Petition No.
36711 of 2014 and disposed of on 01.06.2015, directing the
Official Respondents to receive the sale deeds proposed by the
Petitioners 1 to 6 and register the same as per law.
It is submitted that similar writ petitions arises in the matters of
Section 22 A of Registration Act or referred to the Full Bench of
the Hon’ble High Court of Hyderabad by the Division Bench of
the Hon’ble High Court. In the referred matter the full bench
while disposing of the all the connected writ petitions alongwith
the Writ Appeal 343 of 2015 on 23.12.2015 certain guidelines
for frame to be followed by the Respondents.

It is submitted that Writ Petitions preferred by the Petitioners 7
to 9 were tagged on to the W.P. Nos. 22960 of 2015 and batch
and listed before the Division Bench of the Hon’ble High Court
and followed the Judgment of the full bench in Writ Appeal No.
343 of 2015 dated 29.12.2015.
Accordingly, all the petitioners are aggrieved by the final
judgment and order in Writ Appeal No.343/2015 dated
23.12.2015, hence the present common SLP is preferred.
This Hon’ble Court granted interim order in SLP (Civil) No.
15009 of 2016 and batch on 12.5.2016 and granted interim
order for registering the subject lands, subject to the outcome
of the batch of SLPs to be adjudicated. Petitioner are aggrieved
by the orders of the Hon’ble High Court at Hyderabad in Writ
Appeal No. 343 of 2015 dated 23.12.2015.
Hence the present SLP.
16.11.2014 The 1st petitioner filed WP No.36711/2014
before the High Court of Judicature at
Hyderabad for the States of Telangana and
Andhra Pradesh seeking direction to

respondents to entertain the sale deed
presented by petitioner herein. A true copy of
WP No.36711/2014 dated 16.11.2014 filed by
1st petitioner before High Court of Judicature
at Hyderabad is annexed hereto as
ANNEXURE P-1. [pg
3rd petitioner is absolute owner and possessor
of the land admeasuring 147 sq yards in Sy
No.242/21, Tiruchanuru (V) TirupatiMandal,
Renigunta Sub Division, Tirupati Revenue
Division, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh.
The petitioner wants to dispose of the
property to third party but the respondents
are not entertaining the sale deeds i.e. why
seeking a direction to the respondents to
entertain the sale deed presented by the
petitioner, he filed WP No.36701/2014 before
the Hon’ble High Court of at Hyderabad for
States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh. A
true copy of WP No.36701/2014 dated
16.11.2014 filed by 1st petitioner before High

Court of Judicature at Hyderabad is annexed
hereto as ANNEXURE P-2. [pg
4th petitioner is absolute owner and possessor
- 5th petitioner is absolute owner and possessor

18.11.2014 The 2nd petitioner is absolute owner and
possessor of the land admeasuring 294 sq
yards in Sy No.242/21, Tiruchanuru (V)
TirupatiMandal, Renigunta Sub Division,
Tirupati Revenue Division, Chittoor District,
Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner wants to

dispose of the property to third party but the
respondents are not entertaining the sale
deeds i.e. why seeking a direction to the
presented by the petitioner, he filed WP
No.35090/2014 before the Hon’ble High Court
of at Hyderabad for States of Telangana and
Andhra Pradesh. A true copy of WP
No.35090/2014 dated 18.11.2014 filed by 1st
petitioner before High Court of Judicature at
Hyderabad is annexed hereto as ANNEXURE
P-5. [pg
01.06.2015 The Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at
Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and
Andhra Pradesh passed a Common order and
final Judgment in Writ Petition No. 36711 of
2014 and batch dated 01.06.2015 directing
the Respondents to receive the documents for
registration presented by the Petitioners and
process the same for registration in
accordance with law. A copy of Judgment

dated 1.6.2015 passed by the High Court of
Telangana and Andhra Pradesh in W.P. No.
36711 of 2014 and batch is annexed and
marked as ANNEXURE P6. PAGES ___ TO
___
22.7.2015 The 7th and 8th petitioners are absolute
owners and possessor of land admeasuring
293 1/3 sq yards in Survey No.242/21,
Tiruchanuru (V), TirupatiMandal, Renigunta
Sub Division, Tirupati Revenue Division,
Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh. The
petitioner wants to dispose of the property to
third party but the respondents are not
entertaining the sale deeds that is why
petitioner, filed writ petition No.22933/2015.
22.7.2015 filed by 7th and 8th petitioner before

High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad is
annexed hereto as ANNEXURE P-7. [pg
- The 9th petitioner is absolute owner and
possessor of land measuring 0-03 ½ cents in
Survey No.242/21, Tiruchanuru (V),
TirupatiMandal, Renigunta Sub Division,
Tirupati Revenue Division, Chittoor District,
Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner wants to
dispose of the property to third party but the
respondents are not entertaining the sale
deeds that is why seeking a direction to the
presented by the petitioner, filed writ petition
No.22937/2015. A true copy of WP
No.22937/2015 dated 22.7.2015 filed by 7th
and 8th petitioner before High Court of
Judicature at Hyderabad is annexed hereto as
ANNEXURE P-8. [pg

23.7.2015 6th petitioner is absolute owner and possessor
of land measuring 6 ½ cents in Survey
No.242/21, Tiruchanuru (V), TirupatiMandal,
are not entertaining the sale deeds that is
why, seeking a direction to the respondents to
petitioner filed said writ petition
No.22960/2015.
23.12.2015 Common impugned final Judgment and order
dated 23.12.2015 passed by the Hon’ble High
Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State
of Telangana and for the State of Andhra
Pradesh in Writ Appeal No. 343 of 2015 in
interpreting provisions of section 22A of
Registration Act, 1908 The impugned
judgment has interpreted the provisions of

section 22A in a manner to defeat the rights
of the citizen over immovable property by
authorizing preparation of lists purportedly
under section 22A (1) © of the said Act.
29.1.2016 The Hon’ble Division of High Court passed a
common order in WP No.22960/2015,
22933/2015 and 22937/2015 along with other
connected writ petitions.
12.5.2016 This Hon’ble Court granted interim order in
SLP (Civil) 15009 of 2016 and batch on
12.5.2016 and granted interim order for
registering the subject lands, subject to the
outcome of the batch of SLPs to be
adjudicated. A true copy of the interim order
dated 12.05.2016 passed by this Hon’ble
Court in SLP ( Civil ) No. 15009 of 2016 is
annexed and marked as Annexure P9
Pages ____ to ____
Hence the present Special Leave Petition.

(S.C.R. ORDER XXI RULE 3 (1) (a)
(Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India)
Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.of 2017
(With Prayer for Interim Relief)
Between: POSITION OF PARTIES BEFORE
HIGH COURT IN THIS COURT
1. Vemani Ravindranath
S/o Vemani Shankara
Naidu R/o 19-9-3, Not a party Petitioner No.1
Tiruchanur Road, Tirupati
Town, ChandragiriTaluk,
Chittoor District
Andhra Pradesh
2. Thanikonda
Chiranjeevulu Naidu S/o
Thanikonda Doraswamy, Not a party Petitioner No.2
Naidu, R/o Thati
Thopukandrika Village,
Mittabandi Post, Puttur
Taluk, Chittoor District,
Andhra Pradesh
3. Bathala Munivelu S/o

Bathala Shankaraiah
Naidu, Employee, R/o
Door No. 19-7-104/B4,
First Floor Gopal Raju Not a party Petitioner No.3
Colony, R.C. Road,
Tirupati Urban Mandal,
Chittor District, Andhra
Pradesh
4. Bollini Devararajulu
Naidu S/o Bollini
Guravaiah Naidu, R/o Not a party Petitioner No.4
Door. No. 19-51-106, Old
Tiruchanur, Road,
Pradesh
5. Muniratnam, S/o
Bellalinai Munuswamy
Naidu R/o Door No. 39, Not a party Petitioner No.5
Padmavathipuram,
Tiruchanur Road,
Chandragiri taluk,
Chittoor Dist, Andhra
Pradesh
6. Pendyala Munneyya
Naidu, S/o Pendyala
Subba Naidu, R/o Not a party Petitioner No. 6
Ganganagunta Village,
Panakam Post, Tirupati
Rural Mandal, Chittoor
District, Andhra Pradesh
7. Gangavaram
Sakunthala
W/o Gangavaram
Chinnaiah Not a party Petitioner no. 7
R/o D No.13-1-15,
Peddakaapu Veedhi,
Tirupati Town, Chittoor
8. Laxmikanthamma W/o
Ramakrishna Reddy R/o
Peddakaapu Veedhi,
Tirupati Urban Mandal, Not a party Petitioner No. 8
Tirupati Town, Chittor
9. Sanagaram Laxmi
Narasimha Sarma, S/o
Late. Sanagaram
Subbaramaiah, R/o No. Not a party Petitioner No. 9
1003, 2nd Cross, 9th Main,
Srinivasa Nagar,
Bangalore
10. Gaddem Venkat Not party Petitioner No.10

Subba Reddy S/o
Venkat Reddy,
MaraiahGarapalli,
Mandapampalli Village,
Onpimitta Revenue
Division, YSR Cadappa
11. Gaddem Janardhan

Reddy S/o Venkat Reddy
R/o MaraiahGarapalli, Not a party Petitioner No.13
Mandapampalli Village,
Onpimitta Revenue
Division, YSR Cadappa
12. Ambavaram
Sampoornamma W/o Not a party Petitioner No.14
Sesha Reddy
R/o Mantapampallai Post,
Vontimitta Mandalam,
YSR Cadappa District,
Andhra Pradesh
13. Ratnamma W/o

Ramachandra Reddy
R/o Mantapampallai Post, Not a party Petitioner No.15
Andhra Pradesh
14. Ambavaram Bhavani

W/o Santi Reddy
R/o Mantapampallai Post, Not a Party Petitioner No. 16
Andhra Pradesh
15. Abapatai
Pramellamma W/o
Chandreshekar Reddy Not a party Petitioner No. 17
R/o Mantapampallai Post,
Andhra Pradesh
16. Ambavarnam Shanti

Reddy S/o Chinnapa
Reddy R/o Not a party Petitioner No. 18
Mantapampallai Post,
Andhra Pradesh
Versus
1. The State of Andhra

Pradesh rep. by the
Principal Secretary for Respondent Respondent No. 1
Revenue (Registration), No.1
Secretariat buildings,
Hyderabad, Telangana
2. The District Collector,

Registration and Stamps Respondent Respondent No. 2
Department, Sri Balaji No. 2
Registration District
Chittoor District, Andhra
Pradesh
3. The Joint Collector cum

Settlement Officer,
Chittoor District (AP) Respondent Respondent No.3
No. 3
4. The Registrar Stamps

& Registrations, Balaji All contesting
Registration Office, Respondent Respondent
Tirupati, ChittoorDist (AP) No. 4
5 VinjamuriRajagopala Proforma
Chary S/o V.
Parthasarathacharyulu Respondent Respondent No.5
R/o 3rd Lane, Arundalpet, No. 5
Guntur Dist, Guntur (AP)
6. The Sub – Registrar,

Registration and Stamps
Department, Renigunta, Not a party Respondent No. 6
Pradesh
7. The Commissioner of
Endowments Govt. of
A.P. Boggulakunta, Not a party Respondent No. 7
Hyderabad,
8. Sri Swamy Hathiramjee

Mutt, Tirupati, Chittoor Not a party Respondent No. 8
District, represented by
its Mahanth
9. District Collector, YSR

Kadapa District, Andhra Not a party Respondent No. 9
Pradesh
10. Sub – Registrar,

Siddavatam Madalam,
YSR Kadapa District, Not a party Respondent No. 10
Andhra Pradesh
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 136 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
To
Court of India
The Humble Petition of the Petitioners above named most
respectfully Showeth:
1. The present Petition is filed seeking Special Leave against
the common impugned final Judgment and order dated
Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and for the State of
Andhra Pradesh in Writ Appeal No. 343 of 2015 in interpreting
provisions of section 22A of Registration Act, 1908 The
impugned judgment has interpreted the provisions of section
22A in a manner to defeat the rights of the citizen over
immovable property by authorizing preparation of lists
purportedly under section 22A (1) © of the said Act. This
Hon’ble Court granted interim order against the final orders of
the full bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Hyderabad in Writ
Appeal No. 343 of 2015 dated 23.12.2015 in SLP (C ) 15009 of
2016. The petitioners herein are challenging the final orders of
the Hon’ble Court in Writ Appeal No. 343 of 2015 dated

23.12.2015. Hence, a batch of matters pending before this
Hon’ble Court.
2. QUESTION OF LAW:
The following questions of law arises for consideration of
the Hon’ble Court: -
2.1 Whether the ratio laid down in judgment of the full bench
in Writ Appeal No.343/2015 dated 23.12.2015 and
framing guidelines is permissible under Indian Judiciary?
2.2 Whether the guidelines framed by the Full Bench in WA
No.343/2015 dated 23.12.2015 is ultra vires to provisions
of Registration Act, 1908 and Rules framed there under?
2.3 Whether departmental guidelines can be treated at par
with subordinate legislation and have the effect of ousting
title over immovable property vested and recognized by
decrees of competent civil courts?
2.4 Whether the provisions of Registration Act, 1908 can be
read to negate vested rights in immovable property
without reference to any other provisions governing the
issue of title over immovable property?

2.5 Whether the full bench of the High Court was justified in
passing sweeping directions without reference to the
effect of such directions on specific facts of individual
cases, where vested rights of ownership over immovable
property recognized by decrees of competent civil courts
have attained finality?
2.6 Whether the declaration of law by full bench of High court
on the interpretation of section 22A of the Registration
Act, 1908 negates the settled principles of law covering
the issue of ownership over immovable property and the
manner to establish title?
2.7 Whether by authorizing issuance of Lists purportedly in
exercise of power u/s 22A (1) © without any basis in law
governing title over immovable property, substantiate
ownership rights recognized by way of decrees of
competent civil court are being defeated by the
respondents in complete violation of Article 14, 21 and
300A of constitution?
2.8 Whether the impugned judgment of full bench and
consequent conduct of sub registration refusing to even
entertain and register documents is legally sustainable?

2.9 Whether section 22 (1) © of Registration Act, 1908 can
be interpreted to be a source of power to Commissioner
of Endowment to defeat title of citizen over immovable
property recognized in law?
2.10 Whether section 22 A (1) © of Registration Act, 1908 has
application in the absence of any independent title in the
named in said provision?
3. DECLARATION IN TERMS OF RULE 3 (2):
The petitioners state that no other petition seeking leave
to writ petition has been filed by them against the Impugned
Judgment / Order.
4. DECLARATION IN TERMS OF RULES:-
Annexure P-1 to P-10 annexed to this petition are true
copies of the pleadings / documents which formed part of the
record of the case in the court below against whose order leave
to writ petition is sought for in this case. They are essential for
the proper consideration of the case.
5. GROUNDS:-
a. Because the full court of Hon’ble High Court has erred in
interpreting the scope of section 22A of Registration Act,
1908 as amended in AP.
b. Because the impugned judgment has not considered the
tenets of civil law governing the subject of ownership
over immovable property recognized by law, while
declaring the power of statutory authorities to prepare
lists without reference to any semblance of ownership
over properties included in the lists being forwarded
under the provisions of section 22A.
c. Because the interpretation given by the impugned
judgment to purport and scope of section 22 (1) (c) of
Registration Act, 1908 is legally perverse.
d. Because that the ownership over immovable property is
established under law governing immovable property and
the relevant statutes covering the field. The scope and
purport of Registration Act, 1908 is only to ensure
registration of immovable property in consonance with
ownership to be determined under the general law
governing the subject of title over immovable property.
This power cannot be used to unsettle the ownership and

enjoyment of ownership rights by citizen by purported
powers assumed to be available under Registration Act,
1908 without reference to any principles known to law.
e. Because the impugned judgment suffers from errors of
law. The object of Registration Act, 1908 is completely
lost sight of by the impugned judgment while endorsing
preparation of arbitrary lists by statutory authorities
without reference to any provision of the statutes under
which such authorities were created.
f. Because the impugned judgment has erred in over
emphasizing the guidelines issued by Registration
Department and treating the same as issued by State
Government. The guidelines issued are only departmental
instructions having no favor of even a subordinate
legislation, hence are not binding on the citizen and
should not have been given prominence while deciding
the lis.
g. Because the judgment is violative of principles of natural
justice as it seeks to declare law in rem without giving the
petitioner any opportunity to present their case on facts
or in law, before their valuable rights flowing from their

ownership declared by competent civil court are adversely
effected.
h. Because the impugned judgment of full bench has
interpreted the provisions of Registration Act, 1908 giving
unbridled arbitrary power to the official respondents to
send lists in violation of principle of natural justice
violating the rights of petitioner to deal with their own
property. The said interpretation would make the
provisions violative of Article 14, 21 and 300A of
Constitution.
i. Because the valuable property rights of petitioner herein
have been effectively negative by full bench of Hon’ble
High Court. The petitioner would now be required to go
back to registration authorities to get its property deleted
from the list properties purportedly prepared u/s 22 (1) ©
which has been prepared without any application of mind
and arbitrarily and validity of which is neither asserted
nor established.
j. Because the list of properties purportedly prepared u/s 22
(1) © is completely in violation of legal rights of petitioner
u/A 300-A of constitution of India. The same have been

prepared without adhering to any procedure known to
law only in accordance to whims of Registering
authorities.
k. Because the title over the property is not the subject of
Registration Act, 1908 and in absence of ownership
vested in favor of any trust preparation of list purportedly
u/s 22A (1) © is illegal. In fact Ld. Single Judge of High
Court in two separate writ petitions had occasion to
examine the legality of lists purportedly forwarded u/s 22
(1) © and declared the said lists were prepared without
any jurisdiction which it is submitted is correct position of
law.
l. Because the guidelines issued by the Registration
Department have been construed as if they were issued
by State Government by impugned judgment. In any
event the guidelines are ulra-vires the provisions of
Registration Act, 1908 as they seek to confer powers on
the statutory authorities to send lists of property without
any basis in law.
m. Because the case of petitioner is that the benefit of

declaration of rights over immovable property declared by
competent civil court and admitted by Principal Secretary
to State Government cannot be taken away by a
subordinate of State Government arbitrarily by sending a
list as per their whims and caprice without any rational.
6. GROUNDS FOR INTERIM RELIEF:-
6.1 It is submitted that the above stated lands are the
ancestor properties of the vendors of the petitioner herein, this
Hon’ble Court categorically held in a catena of
judgments that a list sent by Tahsildar or the District
Collector/Revenue Authority showing certain properties belong
to the Government does not have any binding force in refusing
to register. The registering authority shall apply its mind to the
material placed by the private party as well as revenue officials
and arrive at own conclusion. Simply because included the
particular survey number in the list of Government land cannot
take away the rights of the owners of the property. The
registering authority ought to have register the lands basing on
the material produced by the parties concern. Without
application of mind, the registering authority cannot refuse to
register without assigning any reason.
7. MAIN PRAYER
It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court
may be graciously be pleased to :-

137
a) Grant to the petitioner Special Leave to the writ petition

against the common impugned Judgment and order dated
Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and for the State of
Andhra Pradesh in Writ Appeal No. 343 of 2015; and
b) pass any other and further orders as deemed fit and
proper in the circumstances of the case.
8. INTERIM RELIEF
The petitioners prays that this Hon’ble Court may:-

i) stay the operation of the common impugned Judgment
and order dated 23.12.2015 passed by the Hon’ble High Court
of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and for
the State of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Appeal No. 343 of 2015;
and
ii) direct the respondents to register the sale deeds
presented by the petitioners herein; and
iii) Pass any other order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit
IN DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY
DRAWN BY FILED BY
GOLI RAMA KRISHNA SUMANTH NOOKALA

ADVOCATE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
DRAWN ON: 2.5.2017
FILED ON
PLACE: New Delhi

IN THE MATTER OF:

Versus
CERTIFICATE
Certified that the Special Leave Petition is confined only

to the pleadings before the Court/Tribunal whose order is
challenged and the other documents relied upon in those
proceedings. Only accept Annexure P9 as Additional document.
It is further certified that, the copies of the
documents/Annexures P –1 to P -8 and P-11 attached to the
Special Leave Petition are necessary to answer the question of
law raised in the petition or to make out grounds urged in the
Special Leave Petition for consideration of this Hon’ble Court.
This certificate is given on the basis of instructions given by the
Petitioner/ person authorities by the Petitioner, whose affidavit
is filed in support of the special leave petition.
FILED BY
(SUMANTH NOOKALA)
Filed On : 02.05.2017 Advocate for the Petitioners
Exhibit P3
SALE DEED DOCUMENT NO. 292 OF 2014 DATED 7.12.2013

ON THE FILE OF THE REGISTRAR, STAMPS AND
REGISTRATIONS, BALAJI REGISTRATION OFFICE, TIRUPATI,
CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH
Executed by 1) K. Subramanyam ReddyS/o Sankara Reddy R/o
D. No. 7-1, Vasavi Nagar, Mityele Reddy Palle (V )Tirupathi
Urban in favour of 2) P. Srinivasulu Reddy, S/o Jayarama Reddy
R/o K.S. Aggrakaram, ChitvalMandal, Y.S.R. Kadapa District,
Andhra Pradesh
I, the Vendor 1st cited above, the lands stated in this sale
deed was sold by Mr. Kochi Krishna Rao GPA Holder of Mr.
Kochi RangaRao, Krishnaveni, Manorama, that they are the
absolute owners of the property stated is 1st Book volume No.
1345 at P. No. 149, 150 vide document No.
2202/1988,internally they have only limited estate over the
property, later the property was distributed among the
members of the family as stated in E-schedule.The Hon’ble
High Court of A.P. Hyderabad in W.P. 32259/13 on 22.11.2013
directed the Revenue officials to entertain sale deed executed
by the vendor.
Hence, I am willing to sell the property in Sy. 13 is available (v
)Tirupathi Rural Urban Chittoor District. Hence I am executing
this sale deed in favour of Mr. P. Srinivasalu Reddy S/o
Jayarama Reddy.
From today you have to pay the tax if any to the Revenue
Department.
Earlier, this Property was not sold to anybody, nor it is
mortgaged to anybody, there is no title Dispute over the
property if any dispute arises over the property can be perused
by either by me or by LRs on my behalf with my own expenses
today we are handing over the physical possession to you. This
property was not mortgaged to any banking authority if it was
found in future that the property was mortgaged to any bank
Govt. it can be redeemed by us only this sale deed was
executed by me with my concern without any fear or threat
from anybody.
Sd/-
//True Translated copy//

Exhibit P4

Executed by 1) K. Subramanyam Reddy S/o Sankara Reddy R/o
Urban in favour of 2) P. Srinivasulu Reddy, S/o Jayarama Reddy
R/o K.S. Aggrakaram, ChitvalMandal, Y.S.R. Kadapa District,
Andhra Pradesh
1345 at P. No. 149, 150 vide document No. 2202/1988,
internally they have only limited estate over the property, later
the property was distributed among the members of the family
as stated in E-schedule. The Hon’ble High Court of A.P.
Hyderabad in W.P. 32259/13 on 22.11.2013 directed the
Revenue officials to entertain sale deed executed by the
vendor.
Hence, I am willing to sell the property in Sy. 13 is available (v
)Tirupathi Rural Urban Chittoor District. Hence I am executing
this sale deed in favour of Mr. P. Srinivasalu Reddy S/o
Jayarama Reddy.
Department.
from anybody.
Sd/-

Annexure P5

Urban in favour of 2) P. Sumantha, W/o Srinivasulu Reddy R/o
K.S. Aggrakaram, ChetveluMandal, Y.S.R. Kadapa District,
Andhra Pradesh
vendor.
Hence, I am willing to sell the property to the extent of 1 acre
in Sy. 13 is available (v )Tirupathi Rural Urban Chittoor District.
Hence I am executing this sale deed in favour of Mr. P.
Sumantha W/o Srinivasulu Reddy.
Department.
from anybody.
Sd/-

Annexure P6

Urban in favour of 2) S. Mallikarjuna Reddy, S/o Subba Reddy
R/o Flat No. 202, Sri Sai Apartments, New Indira Nagar,
Tirupathi Town, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh
vendor.
Hence I am executing this sale deed in favour of S. Mallikarjuna
Reddy, S/o Subba Reddy.
Department.
from anybody.
Sd/-

Annexure P7

Urban in favour of 2) K. Rama Subba Reddy S/o Rama Krishna
Reddy, aged about 46 years, occ: Agriculture, R/o D. No. 1-23,
Mailapalli Village, ChetveluMandal, YSR Kadapa District, Andhra
Pradesh
vendor.
Hence I am executing this sale deed in favour of K. Rama
Subba Reddy s/o Rama Krishna Reddy.
Department.
from anybody.
Sd/-

Annexure P8

Urban in favour of 2) S. Giridhar Reddy S/o Rama Chandra
Reddy, R/o D. No. 1-13, K.S. Agraharam Village,
ChetvelueMandal YSR Kadapa District, Andhra Pradesh
vendor.
Hence I am executing this sale deed in favour of S. Giridhar
Reddy S/o Rama Chandra Reddy.
Department.
from anybody.
Sd/-

Annexure P10
SETTLEMENT DEED/ PARTITION DEED NO. 709 OF 2014

DATED 7.12.2013 ON THE FILE OF THE REGISTRAR, STAMPS
AND REGISTRATIONS, BALAJI REGISTRATION OFFICE,
TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH
Urban in favour of 2) KobakuBalu S/o Subramanyam Reddy,
aged about 29 years, R/o D. No. 7-1, VasaviNagasr,
Mutyalpalle, Village, Tirupathi Town, Chittoor District, Andhra
Pradesh
I, the Vendor 1st cited above, the lands stated in this
settlement deed/ Partition Deed was sold by Mr. Kochi Krishna
Rao GPA Holder of Mr. Kochi RangaRao, Krishnaveni,
Manorama, that they are the absolute owners of the property
stated is 1st Book volume No. 1345 at P. No. 149, 150 vide
document No. 2202/1988, internally they have only limited
estate over the property, later the property was distributed
among the members of the family as stated in E-schedule. The
Hon’ble High Court of A.P. Hyderabad in W.P. 32259/13 on
22.11.2013 directed the Revenue officials to entertain sale deed
executed by the vendor.

By virtue of the partition in the joint family, I am the successor
of the property situated in survey No. 13 Tirupati, Rural and
Urban MandalChittoor District to the extent of Ac. 8.5 cents I
sold 7 acres to the third party, I am executed in this Settlement
Deed to the extent of half acre, out of remaining 1 acre in your
favour as you are my son.
Hence, I am willing to gift the property to the extent of 1 acre
Hence I am executing this gift deed in favour of KobakuBalu
S/o Subramanyam Reddy.
Department.

from anybody.
Sd/-

Annexure P11
SETTLEMENT DEED/ PARTITION DEED NO. 706 OF 2014

DATED 7.12.2013 ON THE FILE OF THE REGISTRAR, STAMPS
AND REGISTRATIONS, BALAJI REGISTRATION OFFICE,
TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH
Urban in favour of 2) KobakuSatish Kumar S/o Subramanyam
Reddy, R/o D. No. 7-1, VasaviNagasr, Mutyalpalle, Village,
Tirupathi Town, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh
I, the Vendor 1st cited above, the lands stated in this
settlement deed/ Partition Deed was sold by Mr. Kochi Krishna
Rao GPA Holder of Mr. Kochi RangaRao, Krishnaveni,
Manorama, that they are the absolute owners of the property
stated is 1st Book volume No. 1345 at P. No. 149, 150 vide
document No. 2202/1988, internally they have only limited
estate over the property, later the property was distributed
among the members of the family as stated in E-schedule. The
Hon’ble High Court of A.P. Hyderabad in W.P. 32259/13 on
22.11.2013 directed the Revenue officials to entertain sale deed
executed by the vendor.

By virtue of the partition in the joint family, I am the successor
of the property situated in survey No. 13 Tirupati, Rural and
Urban MandalChittoor District to the extent of Ac. 8.5 cents I
sold 7 acres to the third party, I am executed in this Settlement
Deed to the extent of half acre, out of remaining 1 acre in your
favour as you are my son.
Hence, I am willing to gift the property to the extent of 1 acre
Hence I am executing this gift deed in favour of KobakuSatish
Kumar S/o Subramanyam Reddy,
Department.

from anybody.
Sd/-


IN THE MATTER OF:

Versus
AFFIDAVIT
I, Vemani Ravindranath S/o Vemani Shankara Naidu R/o
19-9-3, Tiruchanur Road, Tirupati Town, ChandragiriTaluk,
Chittoor District Andhra Pradesh, do hereby solemnly affirm and
state as under:-
1. That I am Petitioner No. 1 in the above matter and I
know the facts and circumstances of the case and hence
competent to swear this present affidavit on behalf of other
petitioners.
2. That I have read and understood the contents of
accompanying synopsis and List of Dates pages B to ___,
Special Leave Petition Pages ____ to ____ paras 1 to 8 and
I.As. are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and
belief, nothing material has been concealed thereform.

3. That the Annexures filed alongwith the Special Leave
Petition are true copies of their respective originals.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
I, the above named deponent state that the facts stated above
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief
and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
Verified at New Delhi on this ____ day of May, 2017.
DEPONENT
IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
I.A. NO. OF 2017
IN
Special Leave Petition (Civil ) No of 2017
IN THE MATTER OF
Versus
WITH
I.A. No. of 2017

AN APPLICATION FOR IMPLEADMENT OF RESPONDETS IN THE
ARRAY OF PARTIES AS RESPONDENT NO. 6 TO RESPONDENT
NO.10
PAPER BOOK
(FOR INDEX PLEASE SEE INSIDE)
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER :SUMANTH NOOKALA

SUMANTH NOOKALA
ADVOCATE
105, OLD LAYERS CHAMBER
SUPREME COURT
NEW DELHI
AUTHORIZATION LETTER
Date: 06.05.2017
To
The Registrar
New Delhi
Sub: SLP ( C ) No. of 2016, D. No. 14348 of 2016

Vemani Ravindranath and Ors.
Versus
State of A.P and Ors.
Sir,
In the above matter the registry has pointed out defect No. 17
ii(a) to file the order dated 5.8.2015. That the said order dated
5.8.2015 is the internal order / docket order of Hon’ble High Court.
There fore the same may not be available for ready reference.
It is submitted that the Respondents are not receiving the sale

deeds present by the Petitioner and they are not giving any written
order and refusing orally to register the sale deeds present by the
petitioners herein.
Therefore ignore the above said defects and number the same at
my risk.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully
SUMANTH NOOKALA
SUVEBDU SUVASUS DASH
ADVOCATE
SUPREME COURT
NEW DELHI
AUTHORIZATION LETTER
Date: 05.05.2017
To
The Registrar
New Delhi
Sub: SLP ( Crl ) No. of 2016, D. No. 13474 of 2016

Neelcanchal Pradhan Versus State of Chhattisgarh
Sir,
I Authorize Mr. , Advocate bearing (Enrolment No.

) to appear before the Registry and refile/defect cure
the above mentioned matter on my behalf.
Kindly allow him to do so.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully
SUVEBDU SUVASUS DASH


Ravindranath SLP

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Ravindranath SLP

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

Vemani Ravindranath and Ors. Petitioners

AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY

The Honor Petition of the Petitioners above named most

petition against the common impugned Judgment and order

dated 23.12.2015 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of

Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana for the

State of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Appeal No. 343 of 2015. The

High Court by its Impugned judgment disposed all the writ

petitions of petitioner herein along with other connected

Court in WA No.343/2015 and batch dated 23.12.2015.

2 That petitioner reiterated the contents of SLP and for the

sake of brevity the same are not repeated herein.

3 That the impugned order passed by Hon’ble High Court

on 29.1.2016 and the same was informed to petitioner by the

Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh.

4 That due to above stated reasons some delay has

occasioned which is neither deliberate nor intentional but

occurred due to above stated bonafide reasons.

For the reasons stated above it is humbly prayed that this

Hon’ble Court may be pleased to

a. condone the delay of ____ days in filing the present SLP

against the common impugned Judgment and order dated

23.12.2015 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at

Hyderabad for the State of Telangana for the State of Andhra

Pradesh in Writ Appeal No. 343 of 2015; and

AND FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS YOUR PETITIONERS, AS

Sub: SLP ( C ) No. of 2016, D. No. of 2016

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

Vemani Ravindranath & Ors. Petitioners

AN APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED

The Honor Petition of the

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. The present Petition is filed seeking Special Leave to writ

petition against the common impugned Judgment and

order dated 23.12.2015 passed by the Hon’ble High Court

of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana

and for the State of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Appeal No.

343 of 2015. The High Court by its Impugned judgment

connected matters on the basis of ratio laid down by Full

Bench of High Court in WA No.343/2015 and batch dated

2 That petitioner reiterated the contents of SLP and for the

sake of brevity the same are not repeated herein.

3. It is submitted that against the orders of the Hon’ble High

Court at Hyderabad has passed a common Impugned

Judgment dated 23.12.2015 and the Petitioner Counsel

has filed the Common Impugned Certified copy of

Judgment in the main matter being SLP (C ) 15009 of

Petition No. 343 of 2015.

For the reasons stated above it is humbly prayed that this

Hon’ble Court may be pleased to

a. exempt the petitioners from filing certified copy of the

Impugned common Judgment and order dated

23.12.2015 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of

Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and

and proper in the interest of justice.

AND FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS YOUR PETITIONERS, AS

AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SPECIAL LEAVE

The Honor Petition of the

Pages to