SHRI KANT Vs. LAL CHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three connected appeals arise out of one judgment dated 11-9-1969 passed by Civil and Sessions Judge, Gyanpur, confirming the judgment and decree dated 16-11-1967 in three original suits Nos. 27 of 1967, 29 of 1967 and 30 of 1967.

(2.) Facts relevant for the disposal of these appeals are these: On 12-10-1964 Lal Chand and Smt. Naurangi executed three sale deeds in favour of the appellants in the three appeals. On that date the sale deeds were presented to the Sub-Registrar, Bhadohi, district Varanasi by the vendees appellants. The vendees appellants did not pay registration fee. The Sub-Registrar returned the sale deeds to the appellants. He made an endorsement-on the back of the sale deeds that as registration fee was not paid by the persons presenting the sale deeds, they were returned. On 10-11-1964, the appellants vendees again presented the sale deeds to the Sub-Registrar for registration. The vendors respondents were not present. Notice was issued to them, but they did not come up. Consequently on 20-1-1965, the Sub-Registrar refused to register the sale deeds and made an endorsement of refusal on the back of the sale deeds. The vendees appellants filed appeal before the District Registrar under Sec. 72 of the Registration Act, 1908. Their appeals were dismissed on 7-1-1967 on the ground that the return of sale deeds by the Sub-Registrar on 12-10-1964 amounted to refusal and as such the vendees should have preferred an appeal against the endorsement dated 12-10-1964 and as no appeal was preferred against that endorsement, the appeal against the refusal dated 20-1-1965 was not maintainable. Thereafter on 4-2-1967, the appellants filed suits under Sec. 77 of the Registration Act.

(3.) The vendors respondents contested the suits. It was held by the trial court that there was no provision for returning these sale deeds, that the Sub-Registrar could either register the deeds or refuse to register them, that the appellants should have filed an appeal against the order dated 12-10-1964 under Sec. 72 of the Registration Act and that as they did not file such an appeal, suits under Sec. 77 of the Registration Act were not maintainable. The lower appellate court took the same view.