MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Delay in Sale Deed Registration After Full Payment Cannot Justify Denial of Auctioned Property: Andhra Pradesh HC

29 September 2024 12:29 PM

By: sayum


Andhra Pradesh High Court issued a significant ruling in the case of Aditya Academy vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & Others, where the court addressed the 20-year delay in registering a sale deed after a public auction. The court ruled that the delay in completing the registration process could not be used to deny the rightful transfer of property to the highest bidder.

The case arose from a public auction held on September 11, 2002, where the petitioner, Aditya Academy, represented by Karri Venkata Krishna Reddy, emerged as the highest bidder for a property belonging to Sri Nookalamma Vari Devasthanam in Kakinada. Despite paying the full bid amount of ₹34,75,000 by June 2003, the sale deed was never registered in favor of the academy, leading to a prolonged legal battle.

The academy had been in possession of the property for over 20 years, but the authorities refused to register the property, citing delays in paying the remaining bid amount and changes in the academy’s representation.

The key issue was whether the failure to promptly pay the remaining bid amount within the stipulated time period of 15 days could invalidate the auction or justify the authorities' refusal to register the sale deed, despite the full amount being paid and possession of the property being transferred.

The petitioner argued that the full payment had been made and possession granted, making it unreasonable for the authorities to withhold the registration. The respondents, however, contended that the delay in payment violated the auction conditions.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, Aditya Academy, directing the respondent authorities to execute the sale deed. The court held that since the entire bid amount had been paid, and the property was in the possession of the academy, the authorities could not withhold the sale deed indefinitely.

Justice B. Krishna Mohan noted that the auction was confirmed in 2002, and the academy had taken possession of the property. The court emphasized that the delay in payment, though a violation of auction conditions, did not justify depriving the academy of its right to registration, especially since the authorities had accepted the full payment and used the funds for temple purposes.

The court cited Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act and Section 80 of the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, stating that the respondents were legally obligated to complete the registration after receiving the full bid amount.

The court set aside the impugned proceedings dated November 4, 2022, and directed the respondents to complete the registration of the sale deed within two months. The writ petition was allowed, bringing closure to a decades-long dispute over the auctioned property.

Date of Decision: September 26, 2024

Aditya Academy vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & Others​.

Latest Legal News