(1.) The objection to the sale under Section 21 of the Registration Act, based on the vagueness of description of the property sold (see paragraph 4 of the Appellate Court s judgment), is not sustainable. On the question of the validity of the registration of the deed, the Temporary Subordinate Judge s judgment has been so expressed that was are unable to discover whether he meant that in his opinion the parties did or did not intend that property in the one cent of land in R.S. No. 236/2 should pass by the sale deed.
(2.) In the first part of paragraph 5, the Subordinate Judge says "it does appear that (he parties did not really intend to sell or to purchase the said one cent of land." Later on be says that "it cannot be said that it is so patent that the parties intended that the property should not pass in the one sent."
(3.) Finally he concludes this paragraph by finding the let point in the affirmative, that point being itself worded in a negative form.