High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ashwani Kumar & Anr vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 27 February, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ashwani Kumar & Anr vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 27 February, 2009
      IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
                  HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH


                                        CWP No.3119 of 2009
                                        Date of decision: February 27, 2009.


Ashwani Kumar & Anr.
                                                          ...Petitioner(s)

             v.

State of Punjab & Ors.

                                                          ...Respondent(s)


CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT


1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Present:     None for the petitioner.

                                  ORDER

Surya Kant, J. – (Oral):

The petitioners seek a direction to the respondents for

registration of the sale deed.

The petitioners are brothers. Their case is that the subject

property was purchased by their father in a court auction in the year 1956.

After the demise of their father, the property was mutated in their favour in

equal shares and is duly reflected in the revenue records of Tehsil Payal.

The property is stated to be free from all types of incumbrances. The

petitioners wanted to sell the same and entered into an agreement to that

effect with respondents no.5 & 6 on 15.11.2008. A sum of Rs.5 lacs is

stated to have been received by the petitioners as earnest money. The

petitioners presented the sale deed in the office of the Sub-Registrar at
Payal, District Ludhiana – respondent No.4 on 28.11.2008 but he refused to

register the same on an plea that there is a complete ban on registration of

all types of instruments. The petitioners’ grievance is that due to delay in

registration, they are unable to receive the balance sale consideration, which

they need urgently. The petitioners have already represented to the

authorities on 8.12.2008 (Annexure P-3), followed by a legal notice dated

15.12.2008 (Annexure P-4), but no action has been taken so far.

Having gone through the contents of the writ petition and the

documents appended thereto and keeping in view the nature of the relief

sought in this writ petition, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the same with

a direction to respondents No.2 to 4 to take cognizance of the legal notice

served on behalf of the petitioners and issue appropriate directions to

respondent No.4, if so required, to register the sale deed presented by the

petitioners forthwith, provided that there is no legal impediment against

registration thereof. However, if the respondents No.2 to 4 are of the view

that, for some valid reasons, the sale deed cannot be registered, such reasons

shall be communicated to the petitioners within one week from the date of

receipt of a certified copy of this order.





February 27, 2009.                                  [ Surya Kant ]
kadyan                                                   Judge