Syfert Injury Law Firm
Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448The petition and amendments thereto shall be signed and sworn to by each petitioner, or, in the case of a corporation, by some officer thereof, or, in the case of a person under disability, by the person filing the petition. It shall contain a full description of the land, its valuation, and its last assessment for county taxation; shall show when, how, and from whom it was acquired, a description of the title by which he claims the land, and an abstract of title; shall state whether or not it is occupied; and shall give an account of all known liens, interests, and claims, adverse or otherwise, vested or contingent. Full names and addresses, if known, of all persons who may have any interest in the land, including adjoining owners and occupants, shall be given. The description of the land given in the petition shall be in terms which will identify the same fully and which will tend to describe the same as permanently as is reasonably practicable under all the circumstances. If the land is in a portion of the state in which land is divided into land districts and lot numbers by state survey, the petition shall state the number of the land district and the lot number or numbers in which the tract is located. Before passing a decree upon any petition for registration, the judge, on his own motion or upon the recommendation of the examiner, may require a fuller and more adequate description or one tending more permanently to identify the tract in question to be included in the petition by amendment; and if, in the discretion of the court, it shall be necessary, the judge may for that purpose require a survey of the premises to be made and the boundaries marked by permanent monuments. The acreage or other superficial contents of the tract shall be stated with approximate accuracy; and where reasonably practicable the court may require the metes and bounds to be stated.
(Ga. L. 1917, p. 108, § 7; Code 1933, § 60-207.)
- For survey article on local government law, see 59 Mercer L. Rev. 285 (2007).
- It is necessary for the applicant for registration to allege and prove good title in the applicant. Rock Run Iron Co. v. Miller, 156 Ga. 136, 118 S.E. 670 (1923); Smith v. Board of Educ., 168 Ga. 755, 149 S.E. 136 (1929).
When the applicant for registration does not show that the applicant has a good title to the land, the applicant's petition should be denied. Gould v. Gould, 194 Ga. 132, 21 S.E.2d 64 (1942).
- Land registration judgment, if granted, would not be binding upon an adjoining landowner who was not named and served. State v. Bruce, 231 Ga. 783, 204 S.E.2d 106 (1974).
- When the petition and abstract failed to include certain deeds or to claim registration thereunder, and several were executed during the pendency of the suit, the findings of the examiner and the decrees of the court could not properly be based on such instruments. Lankford v. Holton, 187 Ga. 94, 200 S.E. 243 (1938), later appeal, 195 Ga. 317, 24 S.E.2d 292 (1943).
- Test as to sufficiency of the description of property contained in a deed is whether or not the description discloses with sufficient certainty what the intention of the grantor was with respect to the quantity and location of the land therein referred to, so that the land's identification is practicable. Gould v. Gould, 194 Ga. 132, 21 S.E.2d 64 (1942).
Deed wherein the description of the property sought to be conveyed is so vague and indefinite as to afford no means of identifying any particular tract of land is inoperative either as a conveyance of title or as color of title. Gould v. Gould, 194 Ga. 132, 21 S.E.2d 64 (1942).
If the description is so indefinite that no particular tract of land is pointed out by the instrument itself, the description must be held so defective as to prevent the instrument from operating as a conveyance of title. Gould v. Gould, 194 Ga. 132, 21 S.E.2d 64 (1942).
Petition which describes the tract by bounding land owners, by acreage, by courses and distances, by reference to back deeds and, finally, by reference to two plats, meets the requirements of law. Gordon v. Georgia Kraft Co., 217 Ga. 500, 123 S.E.2d 540 (1962).
- Deed is not invalid when the description is imperfect, if the instrument refers to extrinsic data by means of which the land may be identified. Likewise an ambiguous descriptive clause may be aided by aliunde evidence. But such imperfect or ambiguous descriptions must not be confounded with a description utterly lacking in definiteness. A deed which fails to describe any particular land or to furnish any key to the confines of the land purporting to be conveyed is void. Gould v. Gould, 194 Ga. 132, 21 S.E.2d 64 (1942).
Cited in Couey v. Talalah Estates Corp., 183 Ga. 442, 188 S.E. 822 (1936); Holton v. Lankford, 189 Ga. 506, 6 S.E.2d 304 (1939).
- 66 Am. Jur. 2d, Registration of Land Titles, § 19.
- 76 C.J.S., Registration of Land Titles, §§ 13, 14.
Total Results: 1
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2006-07-13
Citation: 632 S.E.2d 633, 280 Ga. 764, 2006 Fulton County D. Rep. 2267, 2006 Ga. LEXIS 483
Snippet: Appellee. CARLEY, Justice. Pursuant to OCGA § 44-2-64, A A OK, Ltd. filed a petition to register its