YASHPAL SINGH Vs. SHIV RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed under section 16 of the Punjab Revenue Act for setting aside the order dated 28.9.1999 passed by the Commissioner, Ambala Division, Ambala and restoring order dated 31.7.1996 passed by Collector, Yamunanagar.

(2.) FACTS in brief of this case are that Amar Singh owned a large chunk of land in village Dadupur, District Yamunanagar. On his death this land stood inherited by his sons Gurnam Singh, Mem Singh, Mohinder Singh and Jai Parkash. Petitioner purchased land measuring 14 kanal 9 marla from Amar Singh and after his death from his sons through various deeds in joint venture. Halqa patwari entered mutation No. 213 dated 27.12.1991. Yash Pal one of the co-sharers raised objection before circle revenue officer and case was sent to Assistant Collector 1st Grade for decision. Assistant Collector 1st Grade after hearing the parties accepted mutation for 1/2 share measuring 3 kanal 14 marla in the names of Mem Singh, Mohinder sons of Amar Singh bayan bahak Shiv Ram against sale deed of Rs. 30,000/-. Aggrieved by this order Yash Pal Singh etc. the petitioners filed an appeal in the court of Collector, Yamunanagar who vide his order dated 31.7.1996 accepted the appeal and set aside the order of Assistant Collector 1st Grade and also cancelled mutation No. 213. Ld. Collector in his order has held that unless possession of land is transfered mutation cannot be entered. In this case transfer of possession of land is not proved. In the agreement deed dated 1.7.1991 sale proceedings were agreed upon for 12 kanal 16 marlas whereas share of Yashpal Singh etc. comes to 14 kanal 9 marlas and possession was also delivered for 12 kanal 16 marlas which also included the disputed land. Sale deed matured on 27.12.1991 and buyer did not get possession of land at that time. He further held that transfer by registry is not sufficient and the same did not prove transfer of possession to buyer. He quoted 1990 PLJ 491 according to which factum of possession is an important factor. Against this order an appeal was filed in the court of Commissioner, Ambala Division. Ambala who vide his order dated 28.0.1999 set aside the order of Collector, Yamunanagar and restored order dated 16.2.1995 passed by Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Yamunanagar (citations 1987 PLJ 25 and 1987 RRR 25). Ltd. Commissioner in his order has held that it is the duty of revenue authorities to enter mutation on the basis of registered sale deed and Assistant Collector did right while accepting mutation. Order of the Assistant Collector is based on facts and legally correct. Against this order of the Commissioner the present revision petition has been filed in this court.

(3.) THE counsel for the respondents argued that his client was not a party in the civil court procedure (proceedings ?) and in the agreement which was signed, Khasra No. 10/23/1 does not find any mention. In fact, there are no details of the land. The agreement was made in the Police Station which remained unattested and unregistered. According to the law, any exchange deed of property over Rs. 100/- has to be compulsorily registered. On the other hand, the respondent had purchased this land vide registered sale deed dated 27.12.1991. He cited 1987 RRR page 25 according to which exchange of deed of land of value of Rs. 100/- is to be compulsorily registered. Unregistered deed is inadmissible as an evidence. Oral or other documentary evidence to prove exchange is barred by the Evidence Act. According to 1996 PLJ page 15, in mutation proceedings, a recital in the registered sale deed about the possession having passed should be enough for Revenue Officer to presume that the possession has passed and may act on that presumption accordingly. Further in the citation it has been mentioned that a registered sale deed should have preference over the mere agreement to sell which does not confer any title to property. He also argued that the petitioner had opposed the registered sale deed as a consequence of which the proceedings were stalled and after hearing the parties, the registered sale deed was effected.