A defect in the registration process due to the admission of execution by a donee under a deed of gift, after the death of the executant, is a mere procedural error and does not affect the jurisdiction of the Registrar. Such registration is valid under Section 87 of the Registration Act, which protects acts done in good faith by registering officers.

( 1 ) IN this appeal two questions arise for our consideration, (1) whether or not a donee under an instrument of gift which is sought to be registered can admit execution under Section 35 (1) (c) of the Registration Act, the person executing the document being dead and whether registration effected on such admission is altogether void? and (2) whether or not the action of the Registrar in registering the document in question on the admission of such a person is a mere irregularity in procedure without affecting jurisdiction of the Registrar to effect such registration?

( 2 ) SHORTLY stated the facts are as follows: The appellant is the donee from her grand mother Badhika Sundari under an instrument of gift in respect of a plot of land which measures about one bigha. The respondents are in possession of the said land and the appellant filed a suit for the recovery of the said possession. One of the grounds taken by the respondents in the said suit was that the registration of the said deed of gift was invalid such registration having been effected on the admission of the plaintiff? It should be noted that on the date of such registration the executant of the said document was dead.

( 3 ) THE Munsif found in favour of the plaintiff, but on appeal his decision was reversed. The plaintiff has filed the present appeal before us.

( 4 ) THE first, question which arises for our consideration is whether or not the document in question could be registered on the admission -of the plaintiff, in other words, whether or not the plaintiff was an assign within the meaning of Sub-clause (c) of Sub-section (1) of Section 35 of the Registration Act. Sub-section (1) of Section 35 of the Registration Act reads as follows: (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 the execution, or (c) If the person executing the document is dead, and his representative or assign appears before the registering officer and admits the execution, the registering officer shall register the document as directed in Sections 58 to 61, inclusive. "

( 5 ) IT is not necessary for the present purpose to refer to the other provisions of Section 35. In this case, as I have already stated, the person executing the document was dead at the time when the document was presented for registration by the plaintiff and I have also said that the Registrar registered the document on admission of the plaintiff who is the donee under the said deed. The question for our determination is whether or not the plaintiff who is the donee under the said document is an assign within the meaning of Sub-clause (c) of Sub-section (1) of Section 35 of the Registration Act. If she is, then there is no question that the registration was good. If she was not an assign, then the further question will arise whether or not the action of the Registrar in registering the said document was a mere procedural irregularity. On the first question, namely, whether or not the donee under a deed which is sought to be registered is an assign within the meaning of Sub-clause (c) of Sub-section (1) of Section 35, there is a decision of this Court - 'akshoy Chandra v. Manmatha Nath' AIR 1917 Cal 269 (I) (A) which took the view that a donee under a deed of gift is an assign of the executant within the meaning of Section 35 of the Registration Act and may when the donor is dead, admit the execution of the deed before the Registering Officer. Fletcher J. who delivered judgment in that case observed that the plaintiff" who was the donee under the deed of gift was vested with the interest that the deceased lady (donor) had in the property comprised i