VIDHYAWATI Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition has been filed by petitioners for issue of writ, direction or order in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 4.7.1998 passed by respondent No.1 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition ) directing the Sub- Registrar, Karnailganj, District Gonda to register the sale deed executed in the favour of Respondent No.2.

(2.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record of the writ petition.

(3.) Facts to decide the present writ in brief are as under :- One Late Brij Lal father of petitioner No.2, was bhumidhar having transferable right of agricultural plot No.2807 and 3636 having area 0.23 and 1.09 acer respectively. Late Brij Lal was literate and used to sign the documents. He executed sale deed and his own registered will having his signatures thereon before his death on 21.01.2001. Brij Lal left behind petitioners as his only legal heirs and legal representatives. Respondent No.2 Dinesh is nephew of Brij Lal. A sale deed alleged to had been executed by Brij Lal in his life time in favour of Dinesh, Respondent No. 2 of plots mentioned above. After execution of sale deed Brij Lal disappeared from Sub-Registrar office on the pretext of stomach pain and did not return for getting the sale deed registered. The Respondent No.2 presented the sale deed for registration before Sub Registrar under section 34 of Indian Registration Act, hereinafter referred to as 'Act'. After issue of notices the execution Brij Lal did not turn up. Sub-Registrar treating the absence of Brij Lal as his denial to accept the execution of sale deed refused the prayer of respondent no.2 for registration of Sale deed vide its order dated 12.7.1997(Annexure-2 to writ petition). Aggrieved by the order of Sub- Registrar Respondent No.2 preferred the appeal under section 73 of the Act before District Registrar, respondent no.1. In appeal Brij Lal alleged to had been appeared before Registrar through an Advocate Sri C.P.Singh who filed the written Statement of Brij Lal , wherein the execution of sale deed has been denied. Brij Lal did not turn up before Respondent no.1 inspite of notice, resultantly Registrar, respondent no.1 proceed ex-parte against Brij Lal and after recording statement of respondent no.2 and the alleged witness of sale deed ordered the Sub-Registrar to register the Sale deed by its order dated 4.7.1998 against which this petition has been filed.