9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 321X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 30.11.2011 and the same is liable to be recalled on this ground alone. Validity of registration made - Whether registration of a sale deed relating to a property situated in Bihar, with the office of Sub-Registrar - Mumbai would be valid - Whether the registration of the subject sale deeds could be cancelled on account of the subject property being situated in Ranchi, which at the material time was a part of the State of Bihar, and the registration being effected by the Sub-Registrar, Mumbai – Held that:- The Registration Act, 1908 occupies the field falling under Entry 6 of the Concurrent List, thus, by virtue of Article 246(2) of the Constitution of India, the Parliament as well as the State Legislature would have the power to legislate in respect of the subject matter - the Registration Act, 1908 as amended by the Registration (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1991, would prevail over the existing law (i.e pre-constitutional legislation) as applicable to the State of Bihar - the same does not imply that the law as amended by the Bihar Legislature would have extraterritorial application - The last four words of Article 254(2) of the Constitution of India - "prevail in that State" ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -5-2014 - VIBHU BAKHRU, J. Yogesh Jujia, Rajeev Kumar, Barun Kumar Sinha, Ms. Pratibha Sinha, Amit Goel, Prabhat Kumar, Yogesh Jagia, Amit Sood, Mayank Goel and Lalruatpuia Sailo for the Appearing Parties. JUDGMENT 1. CA No.648/2012, has been filed by the applicants seeking recalling of the order dated 30.11.2011 passed in CA No.1557/2011 whereby the Court directed cancellation of sale deeds registered with the Sub-Registrar, Mumbai with respect to the property belonging to the company in liquidation situated at Plot No.74/A, Sub Plot No. 74/AII of Village Hehal, P.S. Sukhdeo Nagar, P.S.No.203, District Ranchi, Jharkhand and handing over the said property to the Official Liquidator. The applicants have also prayed for confirming the sale of the said property in favour of the applicants. CA No.1838/2013 has been filed by the applicants seeking modification of the order passed by this Court on 11.04.2012 in CA No. 648/2012 (Although, in the prayer made seeks modification of the order dated 30.11.2011, paragraph 9 of the application mentions order dated 11.04.2012). This court, by an order dated 11.04.2012 in CA No.648/2012, had directed maintenance of status quo with respec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plicants filed the present application - CA No.648/2012, for recalling of the directions passed by this Court on 30.11.2011 and also for confirming the sale of the subject property in favour of the applicants. This Court, by an order dated 11.04.2012, issued notice in the application and directed status quo to be maintained. The court further directed that any rent/income generated from the subject property be deposited in a new joint bank account to be operated jointly by the applicants as well as the Official Liquidator. The court also restrained the applicants from selling, alienating, encumbering, transferring or parting with the possession of the subject property till further orders. 7. The applicants were directed by this court on 18.04.2013 to file a complete statement of account and pursuant to the said order, an additional affidavit has been filed by the applicants stating that the applicants deposited a sum of ₹ 18,000/- on 05.07.2012 and further deposited a sum of ₹ 15,000/- in the joint account maintained with the Punjab National Bank, Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi (Account No.3075000101759189). 8. Subsequently, the applicants filed an application being CA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpowered the Registrar, Mumbai to receive and register any document referred to in Section 28 of the said Act, the said authority would continue to be governed by Section 30(2). He, thus, argued that there was no infirmity in the registration of the subject sale deeds being affected by the Office of the Sub-Registrar at Mumbai. 12. In the alternative and without prejudice to the contention that the registration of the subject sale deeds at Mumbai were valid, the learned counsel for the applicants submitted that even if the registration was held to be invalid, nonetheless, the deeds executed on behalf of the company would evidence an agreement for sale of the property. He submitted that as the entire consideration had been paid and possession of the subject property had been handed over to the applicants, by virtue of Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, the subject property stood transferred to the applicants. 13. It was also submitted that the transaction for purchase of the subject property was a bonafide transaction. It was further contended that the property in question was acquired by the applicants more than one year prior to the appointment of a Provisional Liq ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... py of a Resolution of the company alleged to be passed at the meeting of the Board of Directors on 24.11.2000. The said certificate dated 18.12.2000 was signed by Mr P.C. Sen as a Director and the resolution furnished designated him as a Chairman of the company. The alleged resolution authorized Mr P.C. Sen and Mr Ajay Jain, Chief Executive Officer to finalize and execute requisite documents for the sale of property. It was contended that Mr P.C. Sen was neither a shareholder of the company nor a Director of the Company and thus had no authority to sign the said Board Resolution and therefore, the said Board Resolution and all acts done in pursuance thereof were invalid. It was further submitted that a number of payments were alleged to have been made on 18.10.2000, 09.11.2000 and 10.11.2000 in consideration of the alleged sale transaction which implied that the alleged consideration for the sale of the property prior to the said signing of the said Board Resolution. According to the Official Liquidator, the same indicated that negotiations for sale of the property and an agreement regarding the same was entered into much prior to 18.12.2000. And, it was contended, at the material ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the State of Bihar read as under:- 28. Place for registering documents relating to land. Save as in this Part otherwise provided every document mentioned in clauses (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) of sub-section 1 and sub-section (2) of section 17 insofar as such documents affect immovable property and in clauses (a), (b), (c) and (cc) of section 18 shall be presented for registration in the office of the Sub-Registrar within whose sub-district or district the whole of the property to which such document relates is situated in the State of Bihar. 30. Registration by Registrars in certain cases.-(1) Any Registrar may in his discretion receive and register any document which might be registered by any Sub-Registrar subordinate to him. 21. By virtue of the Registration (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1991 enacted by the legislature of the State of Bihar, the Act as applicable to the State of Bihar was amended; Section 28 of the Act was amended to read as quoted above and Sub-section (2) of Section 30 of the Act was omitted. Prior to the said amendments, Sections 28 and 30 of the Act read as under: 28. Place for registering documents relating to land. Save as in this Part otherwi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Legislature of such State, or, as the case may be, the existing law, shall prevail and the law made by the Legislature of the State shall, to the extent of the repugnancy, be void. (2) Where a law made by the Legislature of a State with respect to one of the matters enumerated in the Concurrent List contains any provision repugnant to the provisions of an earlier law made by Parliament or an existing law with respect to that matter, then, the law so made by the Legislature of such State shall, if it has been reserved for the consideration of the President and has received his assent, prevail in that State: Provided that nothing in this clause shall prevent Parliament from enacting at any time any law with respect to the same matter including a law adding to, amending, varying or repealing the law so made by the Legislature of the State. 24. By virtue of Article 254(1) of the Constitution, in the event of any conflict of laws enacted by a State Legislature and by the Parliament in respect of matters listed in the concurrent list, the legislation as enacted by the Parliament would prevail. In a situation, where a State Legislation has obtained the President's assen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of the property to which such document relates is situate in the Union Territory of Pondicherry; and (b) any document registered outside the Union Territory of Pondicherry in contravention of the provisions of clause (a) shall be deemed to be null and void. 27. It was pointed out that the amendment to Section 28 brought about by the Bihar Legislature did not include a clause similar to clause (b) of Section 28 of the Act as introduced by Pondicherry Act 5 of 1999. According to the applicants this indicated that it was not the intention of the Bihar Legislature to void any registrations in respect to property situated at Bihar, which were effected by the authorities in the erstwhile presidency towns and Delhi. It is settled law that the legislature expresses its intent through the language of the statute and accordingly, the language of a statute must be interpreted to discover the intention of the Legislature. In the present circumstances, one is hard pressed to find any other intention of the Bihar Legislature in deleting Section 30(2) of the Act, except to provide that registering documents other than in a manner as expressed by Section 28 of the Act was not available. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocument that was registered by a Registrar of the district in which the erstwhile Presidency towns are located or by the Registrar of Delhi then the provisions of Section 67 of the Act would also have been omitted. In this regard it is relevant to note that the 'The Registration and Other Related Laws (Amendment) Act, 2001 enacted by the Parliament, which finally omitted section 30(2) of the Registration Act, 1908 also deleted section 67 of the said Act. Accordingly, in my view, the Registration effected by the registering authority at Mumbai cannot be cancelled on account of the amendment brought about by the Registration (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1991. 30. The Calcutta High Court in the case of Rumi Sein (supra) has also upheld the registrations effected outside the State of West Bengal even though Section 30(2) of the Act had been deleted by the West Bengal Legislature. The West Bengal Legislature had enacted the West Bengal Act 17 of 1996. By virtue of Section 3 of the said Act, Sub-section (2) of Section 30 of the Act was omitted from the Act as applicable to the State of West Bengal. In the case of Rumi Sein (supra), a controversy arose with reference to two deeds of conv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out that, whereas Section 28 of the Act had been amended by the Bihar Legislature, similar amendments to Section 28 of the Act were not carried out by the West Bengal Legislature. However, in my view, the Amendment to Section 28 brought about by virtue of the Registration (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1991 would not be material to the controversy in the present matter. By virtue of the said amendment brought about in Section 28 of the Act, the Legislature has specified that the Sub-Registrar within whose sub-district or district, the whole property was situated, would be the authority to receive and register the documents. In the un-amended Section 28, even the Sub-Registrar within whose sub-district, a portion of the property was situated, was entitled to register the document. The amendment of Section 28 is not germane to the question, whether the Registrar of assurances of erstwhile Presidency towns and Delhi, by virtue of Section 30(2) of the Act, could register the document conveying immovable property in Bihar. 32. In view of the above discussion, an order cancelling the registration of the subject sale deeds only on the ground that the same were registered by the office of the R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
