TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 1578X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t or a writ court, since registration will have to be allowed once the signature has been admitted. The Registration Act exists so that information about documents can be put into the public domain, where it can be accessed by anyone in order to prevent forgeries and fraud, and so that individuals can be aware of the status of properties. If the interpretation conflating signing with execution is adopted, it would ensure that the Sub-Registrars/Registrars will continuously end up registering documents whose validity will inevitably be then disputed in a civil suit or a writ petition. While the suit or writ proceedings continue, the document would remain on the public records as a registered instrument, which has the potential to cause more disruption. Hence, such an interpretation should not be adopted by this Court. The plea of the Appellant, that the purported sale deed though signed by her was procured by fraud and undue influence, was a matter which raised a serious substantive dispute. In support of her contentions, the Appellant has also adduced before us the inspection report by the Sub-Registrar and the Naib Tahsildar. However, we are inclined to hold that we cannot d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned judgment, the High Court dismissed a petition Under Article 226 filed by the Appellant, seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing an order dated 31 March 2012 of the District Registrar/Additional Collector (Finance and Revenue), Bareilly District Registrar , who is the first Respondent in the present appeal. During the pendency of this appeal, the Appellant has passed away and has been substituted by her legal heir, by an order of this Court dated 9 December 2021. 2. At the heart of this dispute is a certain piece of land admeasuring 3,793 square yards, situated at 110-B, Civil Lines, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, which was owned by one C.P. Singh. During his life time, he had alienated approximately 415 square yards of the land to four distinct persons. After his death, the Appellant, who is his spouse, together with her two daughters, namely Nita Singh and Neelam Singh, and son, Pradeep Singh, became joint owners of the property. A power of attorney was executed on 17 April 2010 in favour of the Appellant by her daughters and son, which is stated to have been cancelled on 27 September 2011. 3. The Appellant is alleged to have entered into two agreements with a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s own. The Appellant stated that the second Respondent had been harassing her into forcibly signing the sale deed in respect of her property. The Appellant further stated that the second Respondent furnished her with misleading and false information in order to get her to sign the papers, all the while even forcing her to hide the transaction from the members of her own family. Specifically in relation to the two transactions in regards the front and rear portion of the land, the Appellant alleged as follows: (A) Details of 100 sq. meter agreement with M/s. Gujral Associates having a market value of not less than Rs. 5 Crore showing a meagre sale consideration of Rs. 1,30,00,000/- on 22.10.2010 forming part of 110-B Civil Lines, Bareilly, stipulating to have paid a sum of Rs. 18,00,000/- to me including a sum of Rs. 90,00,000/- in cash and a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- through cheque No. 111681 dated 03.06.2009 Bank of Baroda, which in fact was never paid to me and the cheque referred to above stands credited in someone else account and not in my account. According to me and the Law the agreement becomes NULL and VOID as the intention of the party is to do a fraud by illegal measures ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... artition between the co-sharers of the land, yet went ahead with the sale deed. Hence, based on her above contentions, the Appellant requested the Sub-Registrar to take action for the forgery which had been committed by the second Respondent and prevent the second Respondent from getting the incomplete sale deed registered for an area admeasuring 1839.48 square meters. 6. By an order dated 17 February 2012, the Sub-Registrar declined to register the sale deed after recording the following statement of the Appellant: I was alone, my signature was forcibly taken on this sale deed, I do not remain well, and I take Alprex also, I am diabetic also, I remain under Hypertension also. Many persons who were 4-5 in number by reaching there, got my signature forcibly. Other paper was read to me, and signature was taken on other paper. I live alone. They trouble me from day to today. The land not so in quantity which they have written. As per them, they try to occupy that house also which is mine. I do not want to execute this sale deed. I be let live comfortably . Relying upon her statement, the Sub-Registrar held as follows: On the basis of the aforesaid statement as Smt. B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he registration of the sale deed presented on 15 December 2011. Consequently, the sale deed was registered on 16 April 2012. 9. Crucially, the Appellant has adverted to certain developments which took place after the order of the District Registrar. According to the Appellant, the Assistant Inspector General, Registration, Bareilly ordered a spot inspection by the Sub-Registrar of the land covered by the sale deed. In his report dated 30 April 2012, the Sub-Registrar concluded that the actual area covered by the deed was 1341.73 square meters, out of which 740.73 square meters was the area of the Appellant's house. Further, the Sub-Registrar noted that while the northern and western boundaries were present as according to the sale deed, the southern and eastern boundaries at the spot did not match with the boundaries mentioned in the sale deed. Later, pursuant to the recommendation of the Sub-Registrar, a further spot verification was also carried out by the Naib Tahsildar. In a report dated 26 May 2012, the Naib Tahsildar stated that the boundaries mentioned in the sale deed were completely incorrect. Further, it was stated that the actual area on the spot was 849.12 square ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this Court by holding that it was wrongly registered? The Single Judge then observed: (i) In terms of this Court's judgment in Satya Pal Anand v. State of M.P. (2016) 10 SCC 767 ( Satya Pal Anand ), the Sub-Registrar Under Sections 34 and 35 of the Registration Act has no quasi-judicial power to conduct an enquiry regarding the validity of the title or legality of the transaction in a sale deed, but only has to ascertain whether the provisions of the Registration Act have been complied with. Questions regarding the validity of the title or legality of the transaction can only be decided by a competent civil court; and (ii) The Sub-Registrar, in the present case, had denied the registration of the sale deed Under Section 35(3)(a) of the Registration Act since the Appellant had, while admitting that she had placed her thumb impressions/fingerprints and signatures on the sale deed, objected to the registration on the ground that her signatures had been taken in a fraudulent manner by representing to her that she was selling only 839 square meters of land whereas the area shown in the sale deed was 1839 square meters. However, it was held that the Sub-Registrar Under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing that the High Court in the exercise of its writ jurisdiction could not render a finding either way, the writ petition was dismissed by the Single Judge while leaving it open to the Appellant to move the civil court for a declaration that the sale deed had been obtained by fraud and was a nullity. B. Submissions of Counsel 13. We have heard Mr. Pradeep Kant, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant and Mr. V.K. Shukla, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the second Respondent. 14. Mr. Pradeep Kant, learned Senior Counsel submitted that: (i) An appeal Under Section 72 of the Registration Act lies to the Registrar against an order of the Sub-Registrar refusing to admit a document to registration except where the refusal is made on the ground of denial of execution. In the present case, the execution of the sale deed had been denied by the Appellant and the Sub-Registrar refused registration on that ground Under Section 35(3)(a). Hence, no appeal would be maintainable Under Section 72; (ii) In any event, in an appeal Under Section 72, it is not open to the Registrar to pursue an enquiry Under Section 74. The procedure Under Section 7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hile concluding that it was thus duly 'executed' by Appellant, is misplaced; (c) There has been no finding in regards to the due execution of the sale deed by the Appellant, which is the matter in dispute; and (d) There could have been no 'execution' by the Appellant when there is a serious dispute between the parties over the area reflected in the sale deed and what had been agreed earlier. 15. On the other hand, Mr. V.K. Shukla, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the second Respondent submitted that: (i) The Appellant has admitted to the execution of the sale deed both in her objections before the Sub-Registrar and in the FIR which was lodged on 4 May 2012, where the Appellant admits that the sale deed was signed by her. If an instrument is signed by both the parties, it is presumptive of the fact that both of them have executed it, though the presumption is rebuttable. In the present case, the sale deed having been signed by the parties and attested by the two witnesses, it has to be regarded as having been validly 'executed'; (ii) Under the Registration Act, the Registrar is vested with a duality of powers: (a) An a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd (ii) Whether the Appellant's admission of her signatures and thumb impressions/fingerprints on the sale deed also amounts to an admission of its execution . However, before proceeding with a discussion of these issues, it is important to understand the statutory framework of the Registration Act. C.1 Statutory Framework of the Registration Act 18. Section 17 of the Registration Act stipulates which documents are compulsorily registrable. Among them, in Clause (b), are non-testamentary instruments which purport or operate to create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish a right, title or interest to or in immoveable property of a value higher than Rs. 100. Section 23, which deals with the time for presenting documents, stipulates that subject to Sections 24, 25 and 26, no documents other than a will shall be accepted for registration unless presented to the proper officer within four months from the date of its execution. 19. Section 32 then entails that every document, to be registered, shall be presented at the registration office by: (a) person executing or claiming under the document; or (b) a representative or assign of such a person; or (c) the agent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the registering officer, or if the registering officer is otherwise satisfied that they are the person they represent themselves to be and all of them admit the execution of the document; (ii) A person appearing by a representative, assign or agent admits the execution to the registering officer; and (iii) Where the person executing the document is dead, their representative or assign appears before the registering officer and admits its execution. On the other hand, Sub-section (3)(a) of Section 35 stipulates, inter alia, that if a person by whom the document purports to be executed denies its execution, the registering officer will refuse to register the document. Section 35 is extracted below: 35. Procedure on admission and denial of execution respectively.- -(1) (a) If all the persons executing the document appear personally before the registering officer and are personally known to him, or if he be otherwise satisfied that they are the persons they represent themselves to be, and if they all admit the execution of the document, or (b) if in the case of any person appearing by a representative, assign or agent, such representative, assign or agent admits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ound that the property to which it relates is not situate within his sub-district, shall make an order of refusal and record his reasons for such order in his Book No. 2, and endorse the words registration refused on the document; and, on application made by any person executing or claiming under the document, shall, without payment and unnecessary delay, give him a copy of the reasons so recorded. (2) No registering officer shall accept for registration a document so endorsed unless and until, under the provisions hereinafter contained, the document is directed to be registered requires the Sub-Registrar who refuses to register a document, except on the ground that the property to which it relates is not situated within his sub-district, to make an order of refusal and record his reasons, and endorse the refusal of registration on the document. Further, the Sub-Registrar is required to furnish a copy of the reasons recorded, to any person executing or claiming under the document. 25. Section 72 provides for an appeal to the Registrar from an order of the Sub-Registrar refusing registration on a ground other than the denial of execution. Section 72 is in the followi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whom it purports to be executed (or their representative or assign) denies execution, any person who claims under the document (or a representative assign or authorized agent) may apply to the Registrar within thirty days in order to establish [their] rights to have the document registered . Such an application has to be in writing, accompanied by the reasons recorded Under Section 71. The statements in the application have to be verified in the manner required by law for the verification of plaints. 27. On such an application being preferred, the Registrar has to follow the procedure which is spelt out in Section 74. Section 74 stipulates as follows: 74. Procedure of Registrar on such application.--In such case, and also where such denial as aforesaid is made before a Registrar in respect of a document presented for registration to him, the Registrar shall, as soon as conveniently may be, enquire-- (a) whether the document has been executed; (b) whether the requirements of the law for the time being in force have been complied with on the part of the Applicant or person presenting the document for registration, as the case may be, so as to entitle the document to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ster a document except on the ground that the property to which it relates is not situate within his district or that the document ought to be registered in the office of a Sub-Registrar, or (b) to direct the registration of a document under Section 72 or Section 75, shall make an order of refusal and record the reasons for such order in his Book No. 2, and, on application made by any person executing or claiming under the document, shall, without unnecessary delay, give him a copy of the reasons so recorded. (2) No appeal lies from any order by a Registrar under this Section or Section 72 provides for that the order of refusal by the Registrar Under Sections 72 or 75 has to be reasoned, and the Registrar is required to furnish a copy of the reasons recorded to any person executing or claiming under the document. It further provides that no appeal shall lie against such an order of refusal. 30. In the event of a refusal by the Registrar, a suit can be filed by a party in terms of the provisions of Section 77 77. Suit in case of order of refusal by Registrar. (1) Where the Registrar refuses to order the document to be registered, under Section 72 or Section 76 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llation may be ordered.-- [...] (2) If the instrument has been registered under the Indian Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908), the court shall also send a copy of its decree to the officer in whose office the instrument has been so registered; and such officer shall note on the copy of the instrument contained in his books the fact of its cancellation . C.2 Validity of the recourse by the Second Respondent 31. The Sub-Registrar before whom the sale deed was submitted for registration declined to order the registration of the sale deed by an order dated 17 February 2012. The order of the Sub-Registrar was prefaced by the statement of the Appellant, which stated that her signatures on the sale deed had been taken forcibly. Before the Sub-Registrar, the Appellant had filed an objection when the sale deed was presented for registration. The Appellant, in the course of her objections before the Sub-Registrar specifically adverted to following grievances, namely that: (i) the second Respondent had furnished false and misleading information to her; (ii) the market value of the land admeasuring 1839.48 square metres was not less than Rs. 7 crores and the sale consideration of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egistrar, in the course of entertaining the appeal, instead took recourse to the powers entrusted Under Section 73. As noted earlier in this judgment, Section 73 empowers the Registrar where the Sub-Registrar has refused to register a document on denial of its execution by a person purporting to have executed it. Subsequently, the Registrar appears to have followed the procedure which is emphasized in Section 74. Section 74 provides for a procedure where the Registrar has a two-fold function of determining: firstly, whether the document has been executed; and secondly, whether the requirements of the law for the time being in force have been complied with by the Applicant or the person presenting document for registration, so as to entitle them to have the document registered. Upon such an enquiry Under Section 74, Section 75 enables the Registrar to order the document to be registered if it is found that: (i) the document has been executed; and (ii) the requirements of the law have been complied with. Section 75(4) also allows the Registrar to summon and enforce the attendance of witnesses to properly conduct the enquiry Under Section 74. 35. Undoubtedly, the power of the Regis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stood this to be the position in her objections filed to the appeal filed by the second Respondent, since she invoked her rights Under Section 75(4), which applies to enquiry proceedings Under Section 74. The appeal against the Sub-Registrar's order was not maintainable Under Section 72. The remedy of the second Respondent, where the Sub-Registrar refused registration on the ground that the Appellant denied execution of the document, was Under Section 73. The Registrar conducted an enquiry under the provisions of Sections 73 and 74. Both parties participated in the enquiry. 37. Mulla's commentary on The Registration Act analyses a situation where an application Under Section 73 is wrongly labelled as an appeal Under Section 72, in the following extract Justice K Kannan, Mulla s The Registration Act (LexisNexis, 2012) pg 416 ( Mulla‟s The Registration Act ): If a refusal is made on the ground of denial of execution, appeal would not lie Under Section 72 of the Act. When the refusal is denied on the execution, remedy is to file an application Under Section 73 of the Act. The mere fact that an application is wrongly headed as an appeal and an erroneous Section o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... denies its execution . However, the word execution itself is not defined by the Registration Act. Before us, two possible interpretations have been urged by the parties: (i) First, that execution is tantamount to signing a document. Hence, once a person admits to their signature on a document, they admit to having executed it; and (ii) Second, that execution cannot be equated with merely signing a document. Hence, even if a person's signature on the document admitted, they can still deny its execution if they did not agree to or understand the contents of the document while signing it. We must now decide which of these two interpretations should be adopted by this Court. 40. The first interpretation of execution is supported by the definition provided in the Stamp Act 1899 Stamp Act . Section 2(12) defines executed and execution in the following terms: (12) Executed and execution.-- Executed and execution , used with reference to instruments, mean signed and signature and includes attribution of electronic record within the meaning of Section 11 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000); However, since the Registration A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Similarly, S.P. Sen Gupta Commentary (supra) sets out the following position Supra at note 16, pgs 389-390, 390, 617-618: A document is liable to be set aside or declared inoperative by a civil court when it was not voluntarily executed. But that is an altogether different consideration nor coming within the jurisdiction of Registering Officer. The correct legal position seems to be that though the Registering Officer cannot take any decision as to the legality and validity of an instrument which has been presented for registration, there cannot be any admission of execution when the plea taken by the executant before the Registering Officer, if found true, would invalidate the deed. An execution does not mean merely signing but signing by way of assent to the terms embodied in the document. When the executant admits his signature on the document but takes a further plea that his signature was taken by force after detaining him in a room or fraud was practised upon him in obtaining his signatures on the deed or he was duped to sign on blank papers etc, and there is no material before the Registering Officer to rebut the plea of the executant, then there cannot be any admis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y signing a name upon a blank sheet of paper.. . Similarly, Ratanlal and Dhirajlal's treatise on the law of evidence states as follows N Vijayraghavan and Sharath Chandran, Ratanlal Dhirajlal: The Law of Evidence (LexisNexis, 2021): [s 67.3] Execution of Document -- Meaning [...] Execution of a document is something different from mere signing of the document. The term execution is not defined...The ordinary meaning of executing a document is signing it as a consenting party thereto..cution of the document means that the executant must have signed or put his thumb mark/impression, only after the contents of the document have been fully stated and read by the executant before he put his signature thereon. Mere admission of the initial by the executant would not be tantamount to an admission of execution of the document. 44. If we are to now look at the relevant precedent on the subject, in Rajendra Pratap Singh v. Rameshwar Prasad (1998) 7 SCC 602, the validity of a decree of the eviction under the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 was in question before a two-judge Bench of this Court. This Court, while considering the provisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Karnataka High Court, while construing power of the Registrar Under Section 74 of the Registration Act, observed: 8. The answer to these questions revolve round the scope of enquiry as contemplated Under Section 74 of the Act. In an enquiry Under Section 74 of the Act, the Registrar should enquire whether the document had been executed, and whether the requirements of the law has been complied with, so as to entitle the document to registration. The Registrar should not only be satisfied that the party in question has signed the document, but he should also come to the conclusion that the signature has been affixed by the party after understanding the contents and the terms of the document. The Registrar should summon witnesses required by the Petitioner to prove execution. The enquiry under the Section should be made by the Registrar himself and once after such enquiry, he is satisfied that the document not only bears the signatures of the executant, but it is also duly executed by the executant, after understanding the contents and terms of the document, he may order the document to be registered. In the said enquiry he has no power to enter into probabilities and surroundin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... execution therefore must amount to an admission that the person admitting entered into an obligation under the instrument; in other words, that he had executed the document, signed it as a sale deed, mortgage deed, or a lease deed, as the case may be. 48. In Jogesh Prasad Singh and Ors. v. Ramchandar Prasad Singh and Ors. 1950 SCC OnLine Pat 31 ( Jogesh Prasad Singh ), a Division Bench of the Patna High Court noted that the meaning of the phrase execution of a document had been well settled by another Division Bench of the High Court in Ebadut Ali v. Muhammad Fareed AIR (3) 1916 Pat 206 : 35 Ind. Cas. 56 ( Ebadut Ali ). The decision of the Division Bench in Ebadut Ali (supra), which was cited with approval in Jogesh Prasad Singh (supra), held: In our view, execution consists in signing a document written out and read over and understood, and does not consist of merely signing a name upon a blank sheet of paper. To be executed a document must be in existence; where there is no document in existence, there cannot be execution...Where an executant clearly says that he signed on blank paper and that the document which he had authorised is not the document which he contemplate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have put or have caused to be put their names to it. Personal signature is not required, and Anr. person, duly authorized, may, by writing the name of the party executing, bring about his valid execution, and put him under the obligations involved. Hence 'the words person executing in the Act cannot be read merely as person signing . They mean something more, namely, the person, who by a valid execution enters into obligation under the instrument. When the appearance referred to is for the purpose of admitting the execution already accomplished, there is nothing to prevent the executing person appearing either in person or by any authorized and competent attorney in order to make a valid admission. Their Lordships have failed to find in the scheme of the Act anything repugnant to this construction. Any other would involve risk of confusion and might even defeat the statutory procedure by multiplying the persons, who have to be traced and induced to attend, either by themselves or by some representative. (emphasis supplied) 51. In Ghasita Ram Bajaj v. Raj Kamal Radio Electronic 1973 SCC OnLine Del 109, a Single Judge of the Delhi High Court, while differentiating bet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly its contents. The executant of a document must, after fully understanding the contents and the tenor of the document, put his signature or affix his thumb-impression. In other words, the execution of a document does not mean merely signing but signing by way of assent to the terms of the contract of alienation embodied in the document. 54. In Union Bank of India v. Dhian Pati 1996 SCC OnLine HP 90, a Single Judge of the Himachal Pradesh High Court had to determine whether a deed of mortgage had been validly executed. Since the Indian Contract Act, 1872 and the Registration Act did not define execution , the Single Judge deduced the meaning of the phrase in dictionaries, legal lexicons and precedent. Thereafter, the Single Judge concluded: 21. Thus, on the basis of the aforesaid meaning of the words execution of document it only signifies that the person executing such a document should sign such a document with free consent. The execution of a document would be complete in case the executant had signed the document voluntarily, without any duress, knowing the contents of the document. 55. While interpreting the provisions of the Evidence Act, In Re Kuttadan Velayu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would unfairly put the burden upon the person denying execution to challenge the registration before a civil court or a writ court, since registration will have to be allowed once the signature has been admitted. 58. In giving meaning to the expression execute in the provisions of the Registration Act, it is necessary to adopt a purposive construction to protect, facilitate and achieve the object of registration. In Suraj Lamps and Industries Private Limited v. State of Haryana and Anr. (2009) 7 SCC 363, Justice R.V. Raveendran, speaking for a two-judge Bench of this Court, highlighted the purpose of registration: 18. Registration provides safety and security to transactions relating to immovable property, even if the document is lost or destroyed. It gives publicity and public exposure to documents thereby preventing forgeries and frauds in regard to transactions and execution of documents. Registration provides information to people who may deal with a property, as to the nature and extent of the rights which persons may have, affecting that property. In other words, it enables people to find out whether any particular property with which they are concerned, has been su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cution - it is important to consider the power of the Sub-Registrar/Registrar and their procedures under the Registration Act. 62. In Smt. Raisa Begam v. District Registrar, Saharanpur and Anr. 2011 SCC OnLine All 2335, a Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court observed: 33. Section 35 requires for satisfaction of the Registrar about execution of the document. If a document is properly presented and its execution is admitted by the competent person, as prescribed in statute, the Registrar has no option but to register the document. The purpose of Registration Act was to mitigate litigation in regard to property which in the absence of any documentary evidence was creating lot of administrative and otherwise problem to the then Government. It neither confers title upon the concerned person nor validates it but only recognizes execution of document relating to a transaction pertaining to property of the person concerned and acts like evidence to prove such transaction in the manner it is written in the document and registered with the Registrar. The Single Judge then adverted to the U.P. Registration Manual, more particularly paragraphs 285, 304, 305, 306 and 307. Paragra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l satisfy himself of their identity. Such descriptive rolls afford in themselves no proof identity. The Single Judge held that where a serious question of fraud and manipulation was raised in a summary proceeding, such as the proceeding before the District Registrar, it would not have been a substitute to decide a serious civil dispute which has the effect of transferring an immoveable property from its owners to others. Hence, when the document was not presented by the proper person before the Sub-Registrar and the executant denied its execution, it was held that the remedy lay in filing a civil suit for declaration and specific performance, and not in the summary proceedings Under Sections 72 and 73 of the Registration Act. 63. Section 73 of the Registration Act envisages that an application may be submitted to the Registrar by a person in order to establish their rights to have a document registered, in a situation where the Sub-Registrar has refused to register the document on the ground that the person by whom it purports to have been executed has denied its execution. Section 74 then lays down the procedure which is to be followed by the Registrar, which contemplates a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... usive and is amenable to judicial review. 64. Therefore, in a situation where an individual admits their signature on a document but denies its execution, the Sub-Registrar is bound to refuse registration in accordance with Sections 35(3)(a) of the Registration Act. Subsequently, if an application if filed Under Section 73, the Registrar is entrusted with the power of conducting an enquiry of a quasi-judicial nature Under Section 74. If the Registrar passes an order refusing registration Under Section 76, the party presenting the document for registration has the remedy of filing a civil suit Under Section 77 of the Registration Act, where a competent civil court will be able to adjudicate upon the question of fact conclusively. 65. Finally, our attention has been drawn to Section 58(2) of the Registration Act, which stipulates as follows: 58. Particulars to be endorsed on documents admitted to registration.-- [...] (2) If any person admitting the execution of a document refuses to endorse the same, the registering officer shall nevertheless register if, but shall at the same time endorse a note of such refusal. It is submitted on behalf of the second Respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fer to a judgment of this Court in Satya Pal Anand (supra), where the three-judge Bench was constituted following a difference of opinion between two Judges. In that case, the mother of the Appellant had been allotted a plot of land by a registered deed by a cooperative society. After her death, the cooperative society executed a deed of extinguishment unilaterally cancelling the allotment of the plot and executed a registered deed in favour of the fifth Respondent. The Appellant objected to the transaction, following which a tripartite deed of compromise was reached with the society and the fifth Respondent. Notwithstanding this, the Appellant moved the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies. During the pendency of the dispute, the society permitted the transfer of the plot to the sixth and seventh Respondents. The Appellant then moved an application before the Sub-Registrar for cancelling the registration of the deed of extinguishment and the two subsequent deeds, but this application was rejected by the Sub-Registrar, inter alia, on the ground that he had no jurisdiction to cancel the registration of a registered document. The Appellant then moved the Inspector General of Reg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... once the document is registered (see Raja Mohammad Amir Ahmad Khan [State of U.P. v. Raja Mohammad Amir Ahmad Khan, AIR 1961 SC 787])...There is no express provision in the 1908 Act which empowers the Registrar to recall such registration. The fact whether the document was properly presented for registration cannot be reopened by the Registrar after its registration. The power to cancel the registration is a substantive matter. In absence of any express provision in that behalf, it is not open to assume that the Sub-Registrar (Registration) would be competent to cancel the registration of the documents in question. Similarly, the power of the Inspector General is limited to do superintendence of Registration Offices and make Rules in that behalf. Even the Inspector General has no power to cancel the registration of any document which has already been registered. This Court observed that Section 35 of the Registration Act does not confer a quasi-judicial power on the registering officer, who is not expected to evaluate title or irregularity in the document. As such, the validity of the registered deed of extinguishment could be placed in issue only before a court of competent j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of the Appellant after the death of her husband; and (v) The full consideration payable under the terms of the transaction had not been received by the Appellant. The plea of the Appellant, that the purported sale deed though signed by her was procured by fraud and undue influence, was a matter which raised a serious substantive dispute. In support of her contentions, the Appellant has also adduced before us the inspection report by the Sub-Registrar and the Naib Tahsildar. However, we are inclined to hold that we cannot decide on the merits of the dispute at this stage, since the Registrar clearly exceeded his jurisdiction by adjudicating on the issue of fraud and undue influence. 68. The Registrar purported to exercise the powers conferred Under Section 74 and arrived at a finding that the sale deed had been duly signed by the Appellant and was therefore liable to be registered. However, the objections of the Appellant raised serious issues of a triable nature which could only have been addressed before and adjudicated upon by a court of competent civil jurisdiction. As a matter of fact, during the course of the hearing, this Court has been apprised of the fact th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
