GIRISH SAREEN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AN important question is involved in this writ petition and it is as to whether, if property is sold by the Tax Recovery Officer under the Schedule to the Income-tax (Certificate Proceedings) Rules, 1962 (for short, "the Rules"), by private negotiation, whether the Tax Recovery Officer is bound to grant a certificate of sale to the purchaser and is required to send a copy of such certificate to the Registering Officer concerned under the Indian Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908) (for short, "the Registration Act"), or not ?

(2.) FOR answering the aforesaid question, it is necessary that the relevant facts be stated which are these ;

(3.) NOW, coming to Rule 21 of the Rules to which reference has already been made in the earlier part of this order, the Tax Recovery Officer is duty bound under the aforesaid statutory provision, the sale having taken place under the Second Schedule to the Act, to send a copy of the certificate of sale to the Registering Officer (Sub-Registrar, Jaipur), but it does not appear that the certificate of sale or its copy was sent by the Tax Recovery Officer to the Sub-Registrar, Jaipur, and the Sub-Registrar, Jaipur, is said to have refused to file the sale certificate in his Book No. 1 on the ground that he has not received any copy of the sale certificate from the Tax Recovery Officer. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the Tax Recovery Officer was duty bound under Rule 21 of the Rules to send a copy of the sale certificate to the Registering Officer (Sub-Registrar, Jaipur). No doubt, under Sub-section (4) of Section 89 of the Registration Act, it has been provided that every Revenue Officer granting a certificate of sale to the purchaser of immovable property sold by public auction shall send a copy of the certificate to the Registering Officer within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the whole or any part of the property comprised in the certificate is situate, and such officer shall file the copy in his Book No. 1. As said earlier, under the rules as well as under the Second Schedule to the Act, generally the mode under which the property attached can be sold is by public auction, but only on the certificate being granted by the Tax Recovery Officer. Sale by private negotiation is also permissible, but the confirmation is required by the Tax Recovery Officer, and, therefore, it will be presumed and shall be deemed that the sale is by public auction. Therefore, the sale being under paragraph 66 of the Second Schedule to the Act, the Tax Recovery Officer was bound to send a copy of the sale certificate to the Registering Officer who was then bound to file a copy of the same in his Book No. 1, no doubt, after the purchaser pays the necessary stamp duty chargeable. It may also be mentioned here that, along with this property, some other property of the same party was also sold, which was allowed to be sold by private negotiation on the certificate having been granted by the Tax Recovery Officer and for this property also a sale certificate was granted, copies of them were sent to the Registering Officer (Sub-Registrar, Jaipur) and he had filed copies of the same in Book No. 1, but so far as the petitioners are concerned, it was not filed in Book No. 1 by the Registering Officer because the Tax Recovery Officer had not sent the copy of the sale certificate to him. This is even otherwise discriminatory.