SARDAR SINGH Vs. ADDL DISTT MAFIS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In both these writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India same and similar prayer is made on similar facts. Direction is sought for quashing the order dated 1.7.1991 by which the application for grant of permission to sell the land was ordered to be returned to the Sub Registrar which, according to the petitioners, tentamounts to refusal to register the deeds of sale and further direction sought is that the sale deeds executed by respondent No. 4 in favour of petitioner be directed to be accepted for registrtation and to register the same in accordance with law without insisting Upon the production of No Objection Certificate.

(2.) It is alleged that 1/2 share in land measuring Rectangle No. 95. Killa No. 11/1(2-16). 11/2 (0-3). 12(4-16). 13 (4-16) 14 (4-16). 18/2(2-0). 18/3 (0- 8) and Rectangle No. 126. Killa No. 23/2 (4- 13). and Rectangle No. 131. Killa Nos. 3/1(3-11). 4(4-16). 7(4-16).. 8(4-16). 13/1(0-13) and 13/2(4-13) situated in village Dichaun Kalan Delhi is held by Kanshi Ram. respondent No. 4. On 26.12.1990/7.1.1991 respondent No. 4 agreed to sell his entire holding at aconsideration of Rs. 2,50,000.00 per acre in so far as land in Rectangle No. 95 is concerned and at the rate of Rs. 2,25,000.00 per acre in so far as land in Rectangle No. 126 & 131 is concerned. A sum of Rs. 4 lakhs on account advance as part sale consideration was received by him. Sale deeds were to be executed in the name of the parties mentioned in the agreement to sell or their nominee or nominees. In terms of the agreement the petitioners were made nominees who through notice dated 6.6.1991 called upon respondent No. 4 to perform his part of the contract in executing the deeds of sale in their favour. 1/2 to be transferred in favour of Sardar Singh (petitioner in CW 2195/91) and the remaining 1/2 in favour of Dalip Singh (petitioner in CW 2196/91).

(3.) On receipt of the notice, respondent No. 4 expressed his desire to perform his part of contract. Two seprate sets of forms for procuring No Objection Certificate under the Delhi Land (Restrictions on Transfer) Act, 1972 (hereinafter called the Act) were prepared which were signed by the petitioners and respondent No.4 and were forwarded to Sub Registrar, Delhi along with a forwarding letter of Sardar Singh. When these forms were presented, copies of agreement to sell and forwarding letter were taken off and returned to the petitioner Sardar Singh at the counter saying that only forms would be entertained, since the price mentioned' in the agreement to sell would not be acceptable in as much as it was less than Rs. 4.65.000.00 per acre, which according to the instructions received from Administrator of Delhi was the minimum price for sale of agricultural land in Delhi, to be recognized and no 'No Objection Certificate' would be issued unless the price agreed to be was more than Rs. 4,65,000.00 per acre. It is also stated that Sub Registrar forwarded the application to respondent No. 1, who is the Competent Authority under the Act. During the processing of application, respondent No. 1 approved the report of Tehsildar to the effect that the market price of the land was 4.65.000.00 per acre and also approved the report that there was violation of provisions of Section 33 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 since the vendor was a Co-sharer. Respondent No. 1 as Competent Authority finding that there was no ground at all for refusing the permission to sell the land still approved the note of Tehsildar that the market price of the land was Rs. 4,65,000.00 per acre and also blindly accepted the note of Tehsildar which had wrongly reported that therewas violation of provisions of Section 33 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954. The application for issuance of No Objection Certificate was, thus, not granted and was ordered to be returned to the Sub Registrar. As a consequence to which it is not possible to get the sale deeds registered or in other words it amounts on the part of the Sub Registrar to refuse the registration of documents. In this background the aforementioned prayers have been made.