The presentation of a document for registration to the Sub-Registrar at a place outside his territorial jurisdiction does not lead to improper registration or affect the validity of the registration, provided that the Sub-Registrar is required to go to the house of the person presenting the document under Section 38(1)(c) of the Registration Act.

V. D. Misra, C. J.—This second appeal by the defendant is directed against the judgment and decree of District Judge, Simla.

2. Shrimati Vidyawati (referred to as the plaintiff) filed a suit claiming to have purchased the property known as Vakil Khana Koti, situate in Shankli, Simla, from the Rana of Koti vide registered sale deed dated 23rd January, 1965. Kanwar Bharat Singh (referred to as the defendant) owned some property nearby. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant had encroached upon a small portion of the plaintiffs land. Despite plaintiffs warning, it is alleged the defendant put up a cow shed upon the encroached land and threatened to make further encroachments. The defendant claimed the disputed property as his. He also alleged that the sale deed put up by the plaintiff was not a valid registered document. It was averred that this document had been presented for registration at village Kilty outside the jurisdiction of the Sub-Registrars Simla, and so could not be said to have been validly registered. The defendant also alleged that the Rana of Koti had no right or title over the land in dispute and, in the alternative, claimed adverse possession.

3. The parties were taken to trial on the following issues.

1. Is the plaintiff not the owner of the suit land and was dispossessed as alleged ? O. P. P.

2. Whether the defendant became owner of the suit land by adverse possession ? O. P. D.

3. Is the suit barred by limitation ? O. P. D.

4. Relief.

4. The trial court decreed the plaintiffs suit as prayed except with regard to khasra No. 325 which was held to be Gair Mumkin Sarak. The defendants appeal was also dismissed. When this appeal came up for hearing on November 7, 1974, the case was remitted to the District Judge with a direction to submit its finding on the following issue : "Whether the document in question was presented by the Rana of Koti to the Sub-Registrar in the area forming part of the District of Simla, then situated in the State of Punjab, or outside that District in the Union Territory of Himachal Pradesh."

5. The District Judge after recording the evidence of the parties came to the conclusion that the place where the Rana of Koti presented the sale-deed for registration was outside the District of Simla. This finding is accepted by the parties.

6. The main question of law which falls for determination in the case is whether the sale deed can be said to be validly presented and consequently validly registered when it was presented for registration to the Sub-Registrar outside the latters territorial jurisdiction ? It is not in dispute that the property in respect of which the sale deed was executed was situated in the then District of Simla and the only proper office where the document could be presented for registration was the office of the Sub-Registrar of Simla. It is also not in dispute that Rana of Koti was exempted from personal appearance in court and, therefore, he had the right to present the document at his house without appearing before the Sub-Registrar.

7. The purport of requiring registration of a document is to ensure its public notice. Where a document affects immovable property, it is necessary that it should be got registered with the Sub-Registrar within whose territorial jurisdiction either the whole or a part of the property is situate. The reason is simple. Anyone wishing to deal with the property can go to the office of the Sub-Registrar concerned and find out if the property is in any way encumbered or there is any defect in the title of the person claiming to be its owner. In other words, a person can find the nature and extent of rights of persons in respect of the property. This, therefore, reduces the chances of a person wishing to buy or accept the property as a security from being cheated or defrauded.

8. Now under the law the document has to be registered with the Sub- Registrar in whose jurisdiction the property is situate. It cannot be registered with any other Sub-Re