Wamiq Rasool Budoo & Anr vs Ut Of J&K And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 1282 j&K/2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                   AT SRINAGAR
                                                 Reserved on: 04.10.2023
                                                 Pronounced on:07.10.2023


                          WP(C) No.1151/2021

WAMIQ RASOOL BUDOO & ANR.                          ...PETITIONER(S)
      Through: - Mr. Sofi Manzoor, Advocate.

Vs.

UT OF J&K AND OTHERS                              ...RESPONDENT(S)
      Through: -     Mr. Mubeen Wani, Dy. AG.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE

                                 JUDGMENT

1) The petitioners are aggrieved of the order dated 11.06.2021 passed

by the respondent No.3, whereby the application filed by the petitioners

under section 25 of the Registration Act, seeking extension of time for

presentation and registration of the sale deed, has been rejected.

2) It is stated that the petitioners have purchased a piece of land

measuring 11 marlas and 68 sqft. comprising Survey No.1234-min,

Khewat No.351 of Estate Ranil Tehsil and District Ganderbal from

proforma respondents No.5 and 6 through their attorney holder, namely,

Qysheed Hussain Want s/o Mohammad Hussain Want R/o Fazal Haque

Colony, Batapora Zakura Srinagar by virtue of sale deed dated

03.09.2020. The petitioners could not present the sale deed before the

respondent No. 3 for its registration within the period of four months from

the date of its execution i.e. 03.09.2020 as provided by Section 23 of the

Registration Act due to Covid-19 pandemic. It is further stated that the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ petition (Civil) No.03 of 2020,

vide orders dated 23.03.2020 and 08.03.2021, had excluded the Covid-19

period w.e.f. 15.03.2020 to 14.03.2021 in computing the period of

limitation in any suit, appeal, application or proceeding and after the

above said cut-off date i.e. from 14.03.2021, further period of 90 days

period was provided in cases where the limitation period expired during

the period between 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021. The petitioners, as such,

presented the application under section-25 of the Registration Act, with

the respondent No.4 for condoning the delay in the light of aforesaid

reason, which was forwarded to respondent No.3. The respondent No.3

by virtue of order dated 11.06.2021 rejected the application of the

petitioners seeking extension of time in presentation and registration of

the sale deed.

3) The petitioners have impugned the order dated 11.06.2021 passed

by respondent No.3 and also prayed for issuance of a direction to

respondent No.3 to decide the application filed by the petitioners under

Section 25 of the Registration Act strictly in the light of directions of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No.03 of 2020

read with Misc. Application No.665/2021 in SMW(C) No.3/2020 in the

case titled "In Re Cognizance for extension of Limitation vs. XXX".

4) The respondents have filed their response, wherein it has been

stated that the respondent No.4 forwarded application dated 22.04.2021

under Section 25 of the Indian Registration Act preferred by the

petitioners together with the sale deed executed on 03.09.2020 by one

Irshad Ahmad Shah S/o Ghulam Nabi Shah R/o Kachgari Masjid Srinagar

in favour of the petitioners in respect of the land measuring 11 marlas and

68 sqft comprising Survey No.1234-min, Khewat No.351 of Estate Ranil,

Ganderbal, to the respondent No.3 for condonation of delay. The said

application was considered and dismissed as no sufficient cause was made

out by the petitioners for condoning the delay.

5) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners

had purchased stamp papers in the month of September, 2020, and the

revenue extract was also issued in the month of September, 2020 but the

petitioners could not present the sale deed for its registration due to Covid-

19 pandemic. He further submitted that the respondent No: 3 has not

considered the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, extending

the period of limitation.

6) Per contra, Mr. Mubeen Wani, learned Dy. AG, submitted that the

petitioners could not make out a sufficient cause for condoning the delay,

as such, their application under Section 25 of the Indian Registration Act

was rejected.

7)    Hear and perused the record.


8)    The perusal of the record reveals that the sale deed was prepared in

the month of September, 2020 and the revenue extract was also issued in

the month of September, 2020, but due to Covid-19 Pandemic, the

petitioners could not present the sale deed for registration before the

respondent No.4 with in the period prescribed by the section 23 of the

Registration Act. The only reason that has been assigned by respondent

No.3 is that the petitioners have failed to show sufficient cause for

condoning the delay. Sections 23 and 25 of the Indian Registration Act

are reproduced as under:

23. Time for presenting documents.--Subject to the provisions contained in sections 24, 25 and 26, no document other than a will shall be accepted for registration unless presented for that purpose to the proper officer within four months from the date of its execution:

Provided that a copy of a decree or order may be presented within four months from the day on which the decree or order was made, or, where it is appealable, within four months from the day on which it becomes final.

25. Provision where delay in presentation is unavoidable.--(1) If, owing to urgent necessity or unavoidable accident, any document executed, or copy of a decree or order made, in India is not presented for registration till after the expiration of the time hereinbefore prescribed in that behalf, the Registrar, in cases where the delay in presentation does not exceed four months, may direct that, on payment of a fine not exceeding ten times the amount of the proper registration-fee, such document shall be accepted for registration.

(2) Any application for such direction may be lodged with a Sub-Registrar, who shall forthwith forward it to the Registrar to whom he is subordinate.

9) As per the provisions contained in Section 23 (supra), the sale deed

was to be presented for registration within a period of four months of its

execution. Further as per Section 25 (supra), the Registrar is competent

to condone the delay in presenting the document for its registration

provided the delay does not exceed four months after the expiration of the

time prescribed by Section 23 of the Indian Registration Act.

10) The Hon'ble Supreme Court by virtue of its order dated 23.03.2020

had issued direction that the limitation prescribed under general law or

special laws whether condonable or not shall stand extended with effect

from 15th March, 2020 till further orders. Thereafter the Hon'ble Supreme

Court vide its order dated 08.03.2021 further directed that in cases where

the limitation period expired between 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021, all the

persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from

15.03.2021.Thereafter, the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated

27.04.2021 directed that the period(s) of limitation as prescribed under

any general law or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial

proceedings, whether condonable or not, shall stand extended till further

orders. Thus, it is evident that on 22.04.2021, the directions issued by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court vide orders dated 23.03.2020 and 08.03.2021

were in operation. Once the Hon'ble Supreme Court has issued general

directions regarding extension of the limitation period, it was not open for

the respondent No.3 to reject the application seeking condonation of delay

on the ground that no sufficient cause has been demonstrated by the

petitioners for condoning the delay. Even no penalty can be imposed in

terms of section 25 of the Act (supra) during the Covid 19 pandemic.

11) Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed, impugned order dated

11.06.2021 passed by the respondent No. 3 is quashed and the respondent

No. 3 shall pass fresh orders in light of the directions issued by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court and shall issue appropriate directions to the respondent

No.4, with in the period of 15 days from the receipt of this order.

12)     Disposed of.



                                                      (Rajnesh Oswal)
                                                           Judge
SRINAGAR
07.10.2023
"Bhat Altaf, PS"
                   Whether the order is speaking:     Yes/No
                   Whether the order is reportable:   Yes/No