PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
S.S.Kang, J.
Krishna Gopal Kataria
Versus
State Of Punjab
Civil Writ Petition No. 1706 of 1985,
Decided On : FEBRUARY 18, 1986
REGISTRATION ACT - SUB-REGISTRAR'S REFUSAL TO REGISTER LEASE DEED - INSTRUCTIONS FROM STATE GOVERNMENT AND REGISTRAR - VALIDITY - SUB-REGISTRAR'S POWERS AND DUTIES - S. 69, 74 - FARMAN-E-SHAHI DT. OCT. 26, 1943 - APPLICABILITY.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners challenged the legality and validity of instructions issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Patiala, debarring Sub-Registrars from registering sale or lease deeds in respect of properties pertaining to religious places and Deras. The Sub-Registrar declined to register the lease-deed presented by the petitioners, and the Registrar dismissed their appeal.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the instructions issued by the State Government and Registrar were wholly without jurisdiction and not binding on the Sub-Registrar. The Sub-Registrar's powers and duties were defined by the Registration Act, and could not be curtailed by executive instructions. The court also found that the Farman-e-Shahi dt. Oct. 26, 1943, relied on by the respondents, was not enforceable or workable in the present democratic Punjab.
Issues: 1. Whether the State Government and Registrar had the authority to issue instructions to Sub-Registrars not to register sale or lease deeds of properties belonging to religious/charitable institutions? 2. Whether the Sub-Registrar was justified in refusing to register the lease-deed presented by the petitioners based on these instructions?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the powers of Sub-Registrars and Registrars were clearly defined and demarcated by the Registration Act. The Sub-Registrar could refuse to register a document only if it did not comply with the requirements of the Act or if the subject-matter of the document lay beyond their territorial jurisdiction. 2. The court found that there was no provision in the Act requiring or authorizing the Sub-Registrar to refuse to register a document because of any instructions issued by the State Government or the Registrar. The Sub-Registrar's refusal to register the lease-deed was therefore not justified.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the orders of the Sub-Registrar and Registrar, Patiala, as well as the instructions issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner. The court further directed the Sub-Registrar to register the lease deed presented by the petitioners if there was no other legal impediment.
1. At issue, in this writ petition under Arts.226 and 227 of the Constitution is the legality and validity of instructions dt. Oct. 21722, 1982 (Annexure-P-3), issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Patiala, debarring Sub-Registrars from registering the sale or lease deeds in respect of the properties pertaining to religious places and Deras; orders dt. March 14, 1983 (Annexure-P-2) passed by the Sub-Registrar, Patiala declining to register the lease-deed presented by the petitioner and the order dt. June 1, 1984, of the Registrar, Patiala (Annexure-P-4), dismissing the petitioners appeal against the orders of the Sub-Registrar.
2. A broad brush backdrop will help to delineate the contours of forensic controversy :-
3. Surinder Singh, petitioner 2, took on perpetual lease land measuring 4 Bighas belonging to Shivala Mandir, situate in village Badungar, Tehsil and District Patiala vide a registered lease deed dt. July 15, 1982, This land represented 1/3rd share of Khasra No. 456- min measuring 12 Biswas. It was stipulated in the lease deed that the lessee was entitled to sub let the property on the same terms and conditions on which lease was granted to him. Petitioner 2 entered into an agreement for sub-leasing of property mentioned above to petitioner 1 for 96 years vide agreement dt. March 14,1983. This lease deed was presented for registration before the Sub-Registrar, Patiala, respondent 3 by the petitioners, who declined to register the document and passed the following order :-
"The document was presented before me today. On scrutiny it was found out that it is a lease-deed. This land originally belonged to Dera which is now being transferred on a sub-lease. As per instructions of the Government, the registration of the properties pertaining to the Deras and other institutions has been stopped. Therefore, the registration of the lease-deed is declined. A copy of the order and the original lease-deed be returned to the applicant."
4. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal against this order of the Sub-Registrar before the Registrar, Patiala, under S.71 of the Registration Act (for short the Act ),
5. On enquiry, the petitioners learnt that after receipt of some orders from the State Government the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Patiala, issued instructions dt. Oct. 21/22,1982 (Annexure-P-3) directing the Sub-Registrars in the District not to register sale deeds or lease deeds in respect of the properties belonging to religious/charitable institutions, as these were being sold or leased out by the Managers and money received was being misappropriated by them.
6. The Registrar dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioners vide order dt June.1, 1984 on the ground that the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Patiala, as also the State Government had issued clear cut instructions that since the Pujaris/Mohtmims of the religious institutions such as Deras, Thakar Dwaras and Samadhis, etc., were indulging in illegal disposal of lands attached to these institutions in violation of the Farman-e-Shahi and the terms and conditions on which Muafis were granted to these institutions, Sub-Registrars and Joint Registrars should not register such sale deeds and property transactions. These orders were issued to protect the properties of the Deras from being illegally transferred and were in public interest. They were binding on the Registrars and Sub-Registrars. The Sub-Registrar was fully justified in refusing to register the lease deed presented before him. He confirmed the impugned order and dismissed the appeal.
7. Still undaunted, the petitioners have come up with this writ petition.
8. The petitioners challenge the orders of the Sub-Registrar and Registrar and the instructions issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner inter alia on the grounds :-
(i) That the Registrar had no authority in law to issue instructions directing the Sub-Registrars not to effect the registration of a document pertaining to properties be
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.