The certified copy of the Sale Deed did not fulfill the requirements for registration as per the Registration Rules.

JUDGMENT :

Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.

1. The Petitioner is a limited company registered under the provisions of the Registration of Companies Act, 1961 and is in the business of manufacturing and bottling of liquor at Majitar, Rangpo. The Petitioner’s case is that one late Kashi Raj Pradhan and his son, late Bhim Raj Pradhan, agreed to sell a plot of land situated at Baghey Khola, measuring 5.3160 hectares, recorded in their names as well as that of Swarup Raj Pradhan (Respondent No.8) and Kishore Raj Pradhan (Respondent No.9), late Kashi Raj Pradhan being their guardian. Towards this a Sale Deed was executed on 17.01.1983 between the Petitioner and late Kashi Raj Pradhan and the land transferred to the Petitioner while the Sale Deed was submitted to the Office of the Sub-Registrar for registration the same year. Evidently, registration was completed as a certified copy of the Sale Deed (Annexure P-1) was furnished to the Petitioner on 5.12.84, in terms of Rule 8 of the Registration of Document Rules, 1930 (hereinafter “Registration Rules”). That, the Petitioner has since been in possession of the land being of the impression that the right, title and interest thereof stood transferred to it absolutely unfettered. In the year 2009, however, the Petitioner came to learn that the land in question stood recorded in the names of one Sinora Pradhan and the Respondent No.10, Urmila Pradhan. Vide a letter dated 28.09.2009, the Petitioner questioned the Respondent No.3 of the above circumstance in response to which confirmation was received of the fact vide a communication (Memo No. 1013/DCE) dated 01.02.2013. That, the Sale Deed (Annexure P-1) according to Respondent No. 3 had been submitted for registration but could not be registered by the Authority then, for reasons best known to them and the Petitioner was requested by the Respondent No.3 to execute a fresh Sale Deed with the persons in whose name the land stood mutated as the previous Deed could not be considered in view of Rule 28 of the Registration Rules. The Petitioner avers that the ambit of Rule 28 of the Registration Rules pertains to documents which though registered remain unclaimed for a period exceeding three years and not with documents pending registration as in the instant case. In the meanwhile, the search and enquiries pertaining to mutation of the properties and land records in regard to Sinora Pradhan and Respondent No.10 proved futile despite invocation of the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005. Thus aggrieved, the Petitioner approached this Court in W.P(C) No. 39 of 2013 (M/s Himalaya Distilleries Ltd. vs. State of Sikkim and Others) which was disposed of vide Judgment and Order dated 14.11.2013, with a direction that as agreed by the parties, the petitioner could prefer an appeal before the Registrar against the Memo dated 01.02.2013. The Registrar was directed to hear the appeal on merit and the Petitioner was free to approach this Court in the event of adverse orders by the Registrar.

2. Although, the Petitioner complied with the directions and assailed the said Memo dated 01.02.2013 of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate/Sub-Registrar, East District, before the Respondent No.2, the matter was kept pending for almost three years resulting in the Petitioner filing yet another petition before this Court being WP(C) No. 26 of 2016 (M/s Himalaya Distilleries Limited vs. State of Sikkim and Others) complaining of the inaction supra. This Writ Petition was considered on 12.06.2017 and an Order of the same date directed the Appellate Authority to dispose of the Appeal not later than 45 (forty-five) days from the above date. Consequently, on 05.07.2017, the Petitioner was summoned to appear before the Respondent No.2 (Appellate Authority) on 10.07.2017, who upon recording that the original Sale Deed was not before him directed the Respondent No.3 to locate it and also to produce the original certified copy of the deed obtained by the Petitioner. On 21.07.2017,