ORDER : U. Durga Prasad Rao, J. 1. The petitioner seeks writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not registering the documents in respect of land admeasuring Acres 3.50 cents in Survey No. 230/1 of Ananthaiahgaripally Village, Pullampet Mandal, Kadapa District, as illegal, arbitrary and for a consequential direction to the 3rd respondent to register the documents. 2. The petitioner's case is thus: (a) Acres 3.50 cents of land in Survey No. 230/1 of Ananthaiahgaripally Village, Pullampet Mandal, Kadapa District, was assigned in favour of Smt. Mallela Saraswathamma and Sri Mallela Subbarayadu. The assignees obtained loan from Primary Agriculture Co-operative Society, Ananthaiahgaripally, Pullampet by mortgaging the assigned lands and when they failed to repay the loan, the Society initiated proceedings under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 and brought the mortgaged lands for sale in execution of Awards No. 49/201-0-11 and 50/2010-11, dated 01.12.2010 and in the public auction, one Padasala Ramaiah purchased the said land and obtained sale certificate dated 29.06.2012. (b) When Padasala Ramaiah tried to alienate the aforesaid land, the 3rd respondent raised objection on the ground that the land was an assigned land, aggrieved, he filed W.P. No. 22463 of 2012 before the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh and relying upon the judgment in the case of Sub-Registrar, Srikalahasti, Chittoor District and another v. K. Guravaiah and another, 2009 (3) ALT 85 (D.B.) : 2009 (2) ALD 250 (DB), wherein the division bench of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh held that if assigned lands were purchased by the third party in execution of award by the Co-operative Central Bank, they lose the character of assigned land and the Sub-Registrar cannot refuse to register the documents, the said writ petition was allowed and 3rd respondent was directed to receive and process the documents. Accordingly, by virtue of the judgment in W.P. No. 22463 of 2012, Padasala Ramaiah gifted the aforesaid land in favour of his sister Mallela Aruna, who is the vendor of the present petitioner. (c) The further case of the petitioner is that when Mallela Aruna for her personal needs proposed to alienate the said land to the petitioner, the 3rd respondent again refused to receive and register documents on the same old ground that those lands are assigned lands. Hence, the writ petition. 3. (c) The further case of the petitioner is that when Mallela Aruna for her personal needs proposed to alienate the said land to the petitioner, the 3rd respondent again refused to receive and register documents on the same old ground that those lands are assigned lands. Hence, the writ petition. 3. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration for the respondents. 4. A perusal of the material papers shows that Padasala Ramaiah obtained sale certificates from the Officer on Special Duty, District Co-operative Central Bank, Kadapa, in respect of Acres 3.50 cents of land in Survey No. 230/1, which was originally assigned to Smt. Mallela Saraswathamma and Sri Mallela Subbrayadu. 5. Then, the judgment in W.P. No. 22463 of 2012 would show that when the alienation sought to be made by Padasala Ramaiah was objected by the Sub-Registrar on the ground that it was an assigned land, the said Ramaiah filed the writ petition, therein following the judgment of the Division Bench of A.P. High Court in K. Guravaiah's case 2009 (3) ALT 85 (D.B.) : 2009 (2) ALD 250 (DB) (supra), a learned single judge has allowed the writ petition and directed the registering authority to receive and process the document for registration without reference to the ground that the subject lands were originally assigned. Then, a gift settlement deed dated 04.08.2012 shows that Padasala Ramaiah executed gift settlement deed in respect of land in an extent of Acres 3.50 cents in Survey No. 230/1 in favour of his sister Mallela Aruna. Now, it appears, the said Aruna proposes to alienate the same land in favour of the petitioner. Law in this regard is no more res integra. 6. In K. Guravaiah's case 2009 (3) ALT 85 (D.B.) : 2009 (2) ALD 250 (DB) (supra), a division bench of High Court of A.P. has made it clear that mortgage created in favour of a bank by the original assignee of the land is just proper and legal and the assignee of the land can raise money by mortgaging the land so as to develop the land or to do some other better financial activity. It is further observed that when mortgage in favour of co-operative society registered or deemed to have been registered under the provisions of Co-operative Societies Act is not treated as alienation, mortgage executed in favour of the bank by the original assignee would be absolutely just and legal. It was also held that when the property is mortgaged, interest in the property is transferred by the mortgagor to 4 the mortgagee. If the mortgage money is not repaid, the sections provided in the Transfer of Property Act would naturally follow. 7. In the instant case, the original assignees mortgaged the assigned land in favour of the Primary Agriculture Cooperative Society and the same was purchased by Padasala Ramaiah in the public auction held by the Co-operative Societies Bank for recovering the debt due to it. He gifted the land in favour of his sister Smt. Mallela Aruna and she, now, proposes to sell the land to the petitioner. In view of the above flow of title from one person to another, the 3rd respondent is not legally justified in refusing to receive and register the document. 8. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and the 3rd respondent is directed to receive and register the documents in respect of the land admeasuring Acres 3.50 cents in Survey No. 230/1 of Ananthaiahgaripally Village, Pullampet Mandal, Kadapa District, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending for consideration, if any, shall stand closed. No costs.