Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—The writ petition is directed against the order dated 11.2.2010 passed by respondent No. 1, i.e. District Registrar, Saharanpur, in Appeal No. 3/4/2007, allowing the application of respondent No. 2 under Sections 72 and 73 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), directing Sub Registrar to register the instrument allegedly executed by the petitioner in respect to property in dispute, mentioned in the alleged sale-deed dated 28.2.2007.

2. Brief facts giving rise to the dispute are as under: -

3. The petitioner is the owner of Plot No. 334 Hata No. 264 measuring 0.7630 hectares at Mauza Salampur, Village Bhukadi, District Saharanpur. Respondent No. 1 filed an application on 9.5.2007 under Section 73 of the Act, alleging that the petitioner has executed an instrument on 28.2.2007 in respect to the said property, affixing her signature and thumb impression on the sale-deed, registration whereof has been denied by the Sub Registrar, hence, he be directed to register the same. It is also alleged that total consideration was Rs. 3 lakhs out of which Rs. 2,50,000/- was paid and Rs. 50,000/- would be paid at the time of registration.

4. The aforesaid application was initially rejected by the Registrar by order dated 28.2.2007 where against, an appeal was filed which has been allowed by means of the impugned order. The petitioner submitted, when she came to know of a forged sale-deed prepared by respondent No. 2 allegedly having the signature and thumb impression said to be that of petitioner, she also filed a complaint under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C for registering a case against respondent No. 2. He also stated that in respect to the said property, respondent No. 2 has filed Original Suit No. 289 of 2007 seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering in the peaceful possession of the plaintiff, i.e. respondent No. 2 herein. In the aforesaid suit, the petitioner is impleaded as defendant No. 1. The property details given in the plaint of the aforesaid suit is reproduced hereunder :

“Details of Property :

Haqooq Bhumidhari pertaining to land measuring 0.7630 hectare pertaining to Khasra No. 334 Hall Khata No. 264 alongwith 367 Poplar Trees including all the rights and incorrect therein, situated in Village Salampur, Bhukadi, Pargana, Tehsil and District Saharanpur.”

5. The Trial Court granted interim injunction to respondent No. 2, but the petitioner challenged the said injunction order in Writ Petition No. 39831 of 2008 wherein an order of status quo was passed by this Court. This matter is pending.

6. It is said that the civil rights of the petitioner cannot be adjudicated adversely in summary proceedings by respondent No. 1 in the purported exercise of power under Section 73 of the Act and the impugned order is wholly without jurisdiction.

7. Respondent No. 2 has filed a detailed counter-affidavit stating that the petitioner had half share in the property in dispute. The remaining half was already purchased by respondent No. 2 from the owner by the sale-deed dated 11.3.1992 and mutation in respect thereto has already been made in favour of respondent No. 2. Total area of Plot No. 334 is 1.5260 hectares out of which, petitioner and respondent No. 2, both had their ownership to the extent of 50% each. The petitioner desired to sell out her share for consideration of Rs. 3 lakhs in pursuance whereof, she was paid Rs. 2,50,000/-. On 28.2.2007, the petitioner accompanied respondent No. 2 to the Office of Sub Registrar for registration of the sale-deed. Stamp papers were purchased and the instrument was drafted. The petitioner signed thereon and thereafter, it was presented before Sub Registrar. At that time, the petitioner complained about feeling unwell and left the Office of Sub Registrar, stating that she would come on the next date. Thereafter, she did not visited the Office of Sub Registrar despite repeated requests. Since the petitioner thereafter