ZAFAR AHMED Vs. TANWIR IQBAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals have been preferred against the judgment of a learned Single Judge setting aside and dismissing the writ petition of the petitioner, Tanwir Rasul.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts are as under :-

(3.) Pursuant to the Appeal Court's order dated 14.7.1988, the Custodian of the enemy property passed the speaking order declaring Premises No. 6, Harinbad 1st Lane, Calcutta as an enemy property. The said Tanwir Iqbal & Ors. filed 3rd writ petition being CO. No. 5794(W) of 1989 against this judgment. The writ petition was allowed and the order of the Custodian of the enemy property was quashed on 18.6.1992. In this appeal, Officer for the Union of India alleged that the learned Single Judge committed an error in interfering that the order of the Assistant Custodian according to him on the facts stated. The view taken by the learned Single, Judge could not be sustained. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondent has urged that the learned Single Judge has properly appreciated the controversy and holding that the notice was not filed. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the judgment of the learned Single Judge is correct and does not call for any interference. The sale deed obtained by the respondent from Smt. Khadija Bibi about whom the controversy was raised by the appellant was that she was a different lady to whom the property belonged. The learned Single Judge after considering the evidence found that the said Khadija Khatun was the owner of the said property and that she had not migrated to Pakistan in 1949. The property wrongly declared as enemy property. We are of the view that the property had been purchased and a registered sale deed by the respondent which had been attested by the Solicitor. The assertion of the Solicitor which was to the fact that the property belonged to the said Khadija Khatun had been accepted even by the Registrar. Under the sale deed, the title had accrued by the Registrar. Apart from the presumption which is attached to a registered document of its correctness. There was no evidence satisfying that the respondent had not purchased it from its owner. As against the judgment aforesaid, the Union of India filed an Appeal No. 2047 of 1992 ascertaining that Smt. Khadija Bibi was not the owner of the property and she had migrated to Pakistan. The property was rightly declared as enemy property.