The registering authority cannot refuse to register a sale deed based on title disputes or pending civil proceedings, as this exceeds its statutory powers under the Registration Act.

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard Mr.B.B. Naik, learned Senior Counsel appearing with Mr.Ekant Ahuja, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners and Mr.Ayaan Patel, learned A.G.P. appearing for the respondent – authorities.

2. Briefly stated, one Shri Ganeshji Sonaji Thakor executed registered sale deed in favour of one Dave Pravinbhai Kantilal on 27.03.1998, pursuant to which, entry no.3376 was effectuated in the revenue records. The said entry was not certified, as Dave Pravinkumar Kantilal could not produce the certificate of being agriculturist however, pursuant to the registered sale deed executed by Ganeshji Sonaji Thakor, name of Dave Pravinkumar Kantilal was mutated vide entry no.6755. Thereafter, the said land was purchased by deceased – Suthar alias Gajjar Hasmukhbhai Nagarbhai and two others, namely, Bharwad Manabhai Harjibhai and Bharwad Hathibhai Shardulbhai from Dave Pravinkumar Kantilal for which, a sale deed was executed and the same was registered with the ofÏce of the Registrar at Sr.No.1464 of 2011 on 22.11.2011 and since then, the land in question is in the name of the deceased and two other persons, namely, Bharwad Manabhai Harjibhai and Bharwad Hathibhai Shardulbhai. The same was effectuated in the revenue record by Revenue Entry No.6865 at the relevant point of time. The sale deed dated 22.11.2011 and Entry No.6865 are duly produced at Annexure-D. After the said transaction, on filing of the objections, civil and revenue proceedings came to be initiated. Thereafter, as deceased - Suthar alias Gajjar Hasmukhbhai Nagarbhai wanted to sell his 1/3rd of undivided share, he decided to enter into the sale deed with one Sunilbhai Bhagwanbhai Patel, who is the resident of Surat city. That, after execution of the document, the same was produced before the ofÏce of the Sub-Registrar, Becharaji for registration on 23.11.2021 by deceased - Suthar alias Gajjar Hasmukhbhai Nagarbhai with forwarding letter on 23.11.2021 however, the respondent no.3 herein declined to register the same by assigning the reasons that the proceedings of the subject land are pending before the revenue authorities and Civil Court and, therefore, in view of the resolution dated 08.01.2021 issued by the State Government, the registration came to be refused by respondent no.3 by order/communication dated 09.12.2021 (page 20). Between the order/communication dated 09.12.2021 and filing of appeal, Suthar alias Gajjar Hasmukhbhai Nagarbhai expired on 23.12.2021.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by non-registration of the document in question, an appeal under Section 72(1) of the Registration Act came to be filed by the power-of-attorney holder of deceased - Suthar alias Gajjar Hasmukhbhai Nagarbhai. The said appeal came to be rejected by the appellate authority by order dated 30.05.2022, placing reliance on the Government resolution dated 08.01.2021 as referred to by the respondent no.3 and also in view of the fact that the appeal was filed by the power-of-attorney holder of deceased - Suthar alias Gajjar Hasmukhbhai Nagarbhai.

4. Being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 09.12.2021 passed by the respondent no.3 (page 19 to 32) and the order dated 30.05.2022 passed by the respondent no.2 i.e. the appellate authority (page 33 to 35), the petitioners herein are constrained to approach this Court invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India mainly on the ground that the impugned orders are required to be interfered with for the reason that though the objections came to be filed against registration of the sale deed, there are no proceedings pending against the petitioners herein and even if some civil proceedings are pending, it was incumbent f