Ratan Sai vs Kamal Sai
2022 Latest Caselaw 1223 Chatt

                 T OHIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                      Order Sheet
                                  SA No. 162 of 2020
• Ratan Sai S/o Mangal Sai, Aged About 61 Years Caste Gond, R/o Village Lanchi, Police
  Station And Tehsil Surajpur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh
                                                                                ---- Appellant
                                         Versus
1. Kamal Sai S/o Pawan Sai, Aged About 66 Years.
2. Arjun S/o Pawan Sai, Aged About 58 Years.
3. Sikandar, S/o Pawan Sai, Aged About 54 Years.
   Respondents No.1 to 3 R/o Village Lanchi, Police Station/ Tehsil/ District Surajpur

Chhattisgarh.

4. Sukhchand, S/o Pawan Sai, Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Devipur, Police Station/ Tehsil/ District Surajpur Chhattisgarh

5. Motiya Bai, W/o Sita Ram, Aged About 67 Years R/o Village Sounki, Police Station Bhaiyathan, Tehsil/ District Surajpur Chhattisgarh.

6. Shivnarayan Singh Markam, S/o Narmada Singh, Aged About 49 Years R/o Village Podi (Uparoda) Police Station/ Tehsil Katghora, District Korba Chhattisgarh

7. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh

---- Respondents

09.03.2022 Mr. Sushil Dubey, Advocate along with Mr. Aman Upadhyay,

Counsel for the appellant.

Mr. Tarkeshwar Nande, P. L. for the State.

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that trial Court was

decided Issue No.1 whether the consent letter dated 07.01.1994 can be

given effect even without registration. The Court below while deciding the

issue has recorded the finding that the document should be registered

but since there is no rebuttal, therefore, the order has been relied upon.

Learned counsel for the appellant would further submit that the

trial Court and the appellate Court have committed illegality in relying

upon the unregistered document.

The case is arguable and admitted for hearing on the following

substantial question of law:-

"(1) Whether the Courts below were justified in relying upon the

consent letter dated 07.06.1994 which is unregistered document

ignoring the provisions of Section 17-B of the Act?"

Also heard on I.A.No.01/2020, Application under Order 39 Rules 1

& 2 of CPC.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the judgment

and decree passed by the Court below shall remain stayed till the next

date of hearing.

Accordingly, I.A.No.01/2020 stands disposed of.

Issue notice to respondents No.1 to 6. PF as per rules.

Copy of this order be sent to respondents No.1 to 6 along with the

notice issue to them.

List this case after six weeks.

Sd/-

(Narendra Kumar Vyas)

Judge parul