SURAT SINGH Vs. UDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant filed a suit against the respondents under sec. 183 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act in the Court of the Sub -Divisional Officer, Vallabhnagar. It was averred that the land in dispute was in his Khatedari and cultivatory possession and that the respondents had taken unlawful possession of the same. The defendants respondents denied the plaint and set up the plea that the father of the plaintiff appellant had sold the disputed land along with other lands to them and that they were in lawful possession of the same. The trial court framed five issues and after recording evidence dismissed the suit. Having felt aggrieved by this order, the unsuccessful plaintiff filed an appeal in the Court of Revenue Appellate Authority. There, also, he was unsuccessful. Hence this second appeal.

(2.) It has been urged by the appellant who argued his own case that the land in question was never sold by his father and that the defendant respondents had unlawfully taken possession of the same. The learned counsel for the defendant respondent, however, contended that the defendants were in lawful possession of the land by virtue of a registered sale deed. It was also stated that the brother and the son of the appellant had deposed against him in their evidence and that there was no valid ground to interfere with the concurrent findings of the lower courts in the second appeal. The appellant pleaded that he was not on good terms with his relatives and that is why they had deposed against him.

(3.) In order to ascertain the validity of the title of the defendant respondents, a reference was made to the registered deed (Ex. D.l) by virtue of which they had claimed their ownership an possession over the disputed land. A perusal of the endorsement made by the Sub -Registrar, Kanod on 22 -8 -59 is very revealing. On the aforesaid date, Mohabat Singh the father of the appellant, appeared before the Sub Registrar and admitted to have executed a sale deed relating to the sale of the land in dispute along with other lands for Rs. 3000/ - in favour of the defendants respondents and having received Rs. 200/ - in advance. It was, however, added that he had not received the balance of the amount and as his sons were opposed to the sale of the land he had not parted with the same. It is obvious that the claim set up by the appellants on the basis of this sale deed cannot be up -held. As the law stands, the registration of a document is a solemn act, to be performed in the presence of a competent official, whose duty it is to attend the parties and to see that the proper persons are present, and are competent to act and are identified to his satisfaction. All things done before him in his official capacity and verified by his signature will be presumed to be done duly and in order. All that this registration deed goes to prove is that there was, no doubt, an agreement to sell the disputed land between the father of the appellant and the defendants respondents but the sale was not completed and the father of the appellant revoked the agreement before the transfer of the property. The lower Courts have clearly misread this document as evidence of sale and their judgments cannot be sustained.