DINKERRAI KANTILAL TRIVEDI Vs. G P MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these petitions arise from refusal to register the sale deeds. The refusal is on the ground that the petitioners, while giving notice to the Government under Sec. 26(1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, had indicated different names of the intending purchasers. Thereafter the competent authority decided not to exercise the first option to purchase the land on behalf of the State Government.

(2.) In the first petition, the intimation under Sec. 26(1) was in the name of Mistry Bhimji Anand and Hansraj Anand whereas in the sale deed, name of a third person, namely, Anand Jiva in addition to other two persons was also mentioned as the purchaser. In the second petition, intimation under Sec. 26(1) mentioned the name of intending purchaser as Samatbhai Nanjibhai whereas in the sale deed, the name of the purchaser was Ambalal Vajeshanker Joshi. As far as the property and the consideration are concerned, there is no change.

(3.) When these documents were presented for registration, the registering authority had refused to register the same only on the ground that in the notice under Sec. 26(1), the names of the intending purchasers were different than the names mentioned in the sale deeds.