1. Sethi J. has raised doubts about the correctness of the judgment in Haji Habib Ullah Vs. Registrar and ors, reported in 1976 JKLR 430 In the said authority section 35 of the Registration Act does not seem to have been considered which, according to the learned Judge making the reference, would require re-consideration of the said authority.

2. Main Jalal-ud-Din J, as his Lordship then was, has held that payment of outstanding consideration is not a condition for admitting a document to registration, if the execution of the document is proved.

3. To understand the ambit and scope of the points raised in the reference, which fall for our consideration, it is necessary to give a brief resume of the facts of the case, out of which the reference has arisen.

4 Respondents 3 to 5 herein are the executants of a sale deed dated 29 7.1982 executed by them for consideration in favour of petitioners herein. The petitioners presented the sale deed for registration before the Registering officer Srinagar (Sub-Registrar, Munsiff, respondent No: 2, herein. The executants did not appear before the Registering Officer when the sale deed was presented for registration. Since nobody was presen