D VENKATARAYAPPA Vs. K HIRANNAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant has filed this second appeal against the order of the Third Additional Civil Judge, Bangalore, in R.A.58 of 1968, affirming the judgment and decree passed by IV Addl. 1st Munsiff, Bangalore, in O.S. 1706 of 1964, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff.

(2.) The plaintiff filed a suit under S.77 of the Indian Registration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for a decree directing the defendant to get th,e sale-deed dt. 12-10-1961 registered in the office of the Sub- Registrar, Bangalore, City South, if it is presented within 30 days after the passing of the decree by the Munsiff.

(3.) In brief, the plaintiff's case is that the defendant who was the owner cf the suit schedule property agreed on 23-4-1961 to sell the same to him for a consideration of Rs. 6000 and executed, the agreement to sell in fayour of him. According to the agreement, the plaintiff had to discharge a mortgage effected by the defendant in respect of the suit property in favour of Shri Hakim Syed Abbas for Rs.3,000 and a sum of Rs. 1,500 was paid in advance on 23-4-1961. In pursuance of this agreement to sell, the defendant executed a sale-deed in respect of the schedule property in favour of the plaintiff on 12-10-1961. A sum of Rs. 1,500 was paid by the plaintiff to the defendant in the presence of the attestors. The defendant also delivered actual possession of the, suit premises to the plaintiff in pursuance of the sale-deed. The plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. The defendant failed to get the sale-deed registered. The plaintiff presented the document on 1-2-1962 before the Sub-Registrar, Bangalore City South The Sub-Registrar issued a notice to the defendant to appear before him and have the document registered. The defendant appeared before the Sub-Registrar after due date on 13-2-1962. While admitting the execution of the document, the defendant appears to have pleaded want .of consideration and alteration of the document and refused to have it registered. The Sub-Registrar referred the matter to the District Registrar to condone the delay in the appearance of the executant. As the grounds required for the condonation of delay were not satisfactorily established, the Registrar refused to register the document under S.34 of the Act. The plaintiff filed an appeal under S.72 of the Act before the District Registrar, Bangalore. The plaintiff's appeal was dismissed by the District Registrar. Ultimately, the registering authority refused to register the sale-deed. Therefore, the plaintiff has now filed this suit for relief prayed for in the plaint under S.77 of the Act.