The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of proving the execution of a sale deed and the requirements under the Registration Act for presenting a document for registration.

Alok Singh, J.

1. Present second appeal is filed by the plaintiff- appellant assailing the judgment and decree dated 1.6.1987 passed by learned First Appellate Court/Additional District Judge, Jalandhar thereby allowing the first appeal and dismissing the suit of the plaintiff.

2. The brief facts of the present case are that Beant Singh father of defendants No. 1, 2 and husband of defendant No. 3 was the owner in possession of the property in dispute; Beant Singh alienated the property in dispute vide sale deed dated 7.7.1965 in favour of Gurbax Singh father of the plaintiff; father of the plaintiff i.e Gurbax Singh died in the year 1966; that is why he could not get mutation done in his favour pursuant to sale deed dated 7.7.1965; after death of Beant Singh defendants No. 1 and 2 acting as Lrs of Beant Singh once again alienated the property in favour of defendant No. 4 vide sale deed dated 21.4.1981; defendant No. 4 tried to dispossess the plaintiff pursuant to the Sale Deed dated 21.4.1981; plaintiff reported the matter to the police where the matter was amicably settled between the parties, thereafter defendant No. 4 took forcibly possession of the property, hence the suit for possession by the plaintiff.

3. Defendants contested the suit of the plaintiff by way of filing of written statement, besides taking formal legal pleas defence was taken that Beant Singh never executed any Sale Deed in favour of Gurbax Singh as alleged by the plaintiff; plaintiff did not get mutation done; Beant Singh and his family members i.e. defendants No. 1,2 and 3 remained in possession till the death of Beant Singh and from 21.4.1981 i.e. from the Sale Deed in favour of defendant No. 4, defendant No. 4 is in possession. Defendant has matured title by way of adverse possession.

4. Learned trial Court decreed the suit of the plaintiff for possession having observed that Beant Singh was the owner in possession of the property in dispute and had alienated the property in favour of the father of the plaintiff i.e. Gurbax Singh vide Sale Deed dated 7.7.1965, hence Gurbax Singh acquired valid title from Beant Singh and after the death of Gurbax Singh plaintiff is the owner of the property. Learned trial Court did not accept the defence of the defendants that defendants have matured the title by way of adverse possession.

5. First Appellate Court in appeal filed by the defendants observed that plaintiff has failed to prove Sale Deed dated 7.7.1965. Plaintiff failed to produce the attesting witnesses of alleged Sale Deed. Learned First Appellate Court further observed that since Sale Deed dated 7.7.1965 was not proved by plaintiff by producing attesting witnesses hence, plaintiff cannot be said having title of the property. Ultimately First Appellate Court allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit of the plaintiff. Judgment of the learned First Appellate Court is under challenged in this appeal.

6. In the present appeal following substantial question of law arises for just and fair adjudication of the case :-

1. As to whether strong presumption is attached about the correctness of contents of the Sale Deed dated 7.7.1965; in view of Section 32.34 and 60 of Registration Act ?

2. As to whether defendant No. 4 could acquire any title from the LRs of Beant Singh pursuant to Sale Deed dated 21.4.1981, applying the principle "None can transfer title better than be himself has" ?

3. As to whether defendant No. 4 is a bonafide purchaser ?

7. Substantial Question of Law No. 1. - Plaintiffs case is based on registered Sale Deed dated 7.7.1965 allegedly executed by Beant Singh father of defendant No. 1,2 and husband of defendant No. 3. The original Sale Deed was produced before the trial Court. Original Sale Deed contains registration certificate as required by Section 60 of Registration Act.

8. Section 32 of Registration Act reads as under:-

"Person to present documents, for registration.- Except in the cases mentioned in (Sections 31, 88, 89), every doc