Inder Kumar Singla & Anr. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA *** Present: Mr.Sachin Jain, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Sunil Nehra, AAG, Haryana for the respondents. *** KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) The present writ petition has been filed seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent – Sub Registrar, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra to permit registration of sale deed executed by the petitioners in favour of prospective vendees. The grievance made by the petitioners is that even though they had succeeded in the litigation upto Hon'ble Apex Court, sale deed is not being registered on the ground that litigation is pending. To fortify this submission, that petitioners have succeeded in the litigation, counsel for the petitioners has referred to Annexure P7, an order passed in Civil Revision CWP No.18625 of 2008 [2] No.6246 of 2004, decided on 21.11.2006 which was preferred by Vaish Aggarwal Panchayat (Regd.) Thanesar, who are disputing title of the petitioners and Annexure P8, Civil Revision No.3695 of 2006, preferred by the petitioners against Vaish Aggarwal Panchayat and others, which was allowed in favour of the petitioners.

Counsel submit that against these two decisions, two Special Leave Petitions were filed. Special Leave Petition preferred against Annexure P7, Civil Revision No.6246 of 2004 has been dismissed, whereas Special Leave Petition filed against Annexure P8, Civil Revision No.3695 of 2006 is pending and only notice has been issued and stay has been refused. Mr.Nehra appearing for the respondents has referred to preliminary objection No.1 wherein it is contended that petitioners have remedy of appeal and without availing the same, the petitioners have rushed to the High Court and thus have not availed the alternative remedy. Second preliminary objection raised is that petitioners were called upon to produce certified copy of the order passed in Special Leave Petition to show that the litigation has attained finality. Mr.Nehra referring to preliminary objections submit that the petitioners have failed to reproduce the order before the authorities.

To rebut the submissions, Mr.Sachin Jain, counsel for the petitioners has submitted that no order has been passed under Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908 (hereinafter to be referred as, `the Act'), therefore, unless the order is passed, petitioners cannot file an appeal. Counsel has further relied upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court rendered in Hari Singh and another v. Sub Registrar, Narnaul and others, 1998(2) PLJ 17 to contend that Registering Officer cannot refuse CWP No.18625 of 2008 [3] registration of document, conveying ownership of the property which is subject matter of dispute. After hearing counsel for the parties, I am of the view that authorities are required to pass a detailed order under Section 71 of the Act stating the reasons for refusal to register the document. In the present case, no such order has been passed. Therefore, Sub Registrar, Thanesar, District Kurukshetra is directed to pass an order to comply with Section 71 of the Act.

Needless to say that the officer will notice the contentions which may be raised by the petitioners before him, including reliance placed by the petitioners on case law, if any. While passing the order, the concerned officer may also hear any other aggrieved party. In case, concerned officer arrive at a conclusion that sale deed is to be registered, the grievance of the petitioners shall stand redressed. If he arrive at a conclusion otherwise, he will comply with the provisions of Section 71 of the Act. On production of certified copy of this order, the concerned officer will pass orders under Section 71 of the Act within one month. With these observations, the present writ petition is disposed of. October 24, 2009. JUDGE ( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA ) RC