Case Details

Citation(s)
1963 SLG 3439 = 1963 SLD 3439 = 1963 PLD 326
Dacca High Court
Second Appeal No. 266 of 1957, decided on 7th December 1961.  
Presented By: Chowdhury, C. J. and M. R. Khan, J  
Shahabuddin Ahmed for Appellants.   Md. Nurul Huda for
Respondents.   Md. Yakub Hossain for the Deputy Registrar.  

Hazi GOYZUDDIN AND OTHERS----Appellants  

VERSUS

  MUHAMMAD SERAJUL HAQ MIA AND OTHERS ---Respondents  

Law: Registration Act (X VI of 1908)

Section: Ss. 77 & 49

  Registration Act (XVI of 1908), Ss. 77 & 49 read with S. 12, Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-Suit for specific performance of contract to sell immovable property under unregistered document Cause of action in suit for specific performance distinct from that under Registration Act-Executed document whether presented for registration or not or whether suit under S. 77 had failed imma terial-Suit for specific performance of contract for registration barred-Suit under S. 77 relates to registration of document whose registration refused-Court's enquiry in suit under S. 77 not concerned with validity or legal effect of document but confined to: whether document has been executed and requirements of Registration Law complied with-Decree affects only document does not affect transaction-Refusal to decree cannot affect contract of sale remaining unperformed till deed registered-Registration refused-Claimant may sue for specific performance of contract instead of appealing to Registrar under Registration Act, 1908.   Practice-High Court-Reference to larger Bench-Proper only when conflict of decisions in same High Court or in High Courts of same state. JUDGMENT   CHOWDHURY, C. J.-This appeal by the defendants arises out of a suit for specific performance of a contract of sale of the disputed immovable property against defendants Nos. 1 to 22 and registration of the executed kabala or, in the alternative execution of afresh kabala and registration thereof and for confirmation of plaintiff's possession in the disputed land.   This appeal being valued at below Rs. 2,000 at first came up for hearing before a Single Bench and my learned brother Hasan, J. referred the case for disposal by a Divisional Bench as it involves a question of law on which there are conflicting decisions, namely, whether the suit for specific performance of contract for sale and execution and registration of a fresh kabala is maintainable in view of section 77 of the Indian Registration Act. Hence the case has come up before this Bench for hearing.   Facts of this case as alleged by the plaintiff, relevant for the purpose of this appeal,are as follows :-  …
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register