| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 4859 = 2026 SLD 4859 = 2025 PLJ 204 |
High Court (AJ&K)
W.P. No. 2057 of 2021
Presented By: Syed Shahid Bahar, J.
Mr. Mohammad Yaqoob Khan Mughal, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. Mushtaq Ahmed Janjua, Advocate for
Respondents No. 3 & 4. Date of hearing. 6.5.2025.
W.P. No. 2057 of 2021
Presented By: Syed Shahid Bahar, J.
Mr. Mohammad Yaqoob Khan Mughal, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. Mushtaq Ahmed Janjua, Advocate for
Respondents No. 3 & 4. Date of hearing. 6.5.2025.
Sardar GHULAM MUSTAFA KHAN--Petitioner
VERSUS
DISTRICT REGISTRAR/DISTRICT JUDGE KOTLI, AZAD JAMMU & KASHMIR and 3 others--Respondents
Law: Registration Act, 1908
Section: 35, 36
Law: Contract Act, 1872
Section: 202, 203
Registration Act, 1908 (IX of 1908)-- ----Ss. 35 & 36--Contract Act, 1872 (IX of 1872), Ss. 202 & 203--Azad Jammu & Kashmir Interim Constitution, 1974 (VIII of 1974), S. 44--Registration of documents--Cancellation deed (Abtal Nama)--Scope of--Power of sub-registrar--Refusal to register--Denial of execution--Power of attorney--Revocation--Writ petition--Maintainability--Alternate remedy--Efficaciousness--Denial of execution of document on part of alleged executant or executants is only eventuality which could lead to denial qua registering a document on part of A registering officer--Registration of document under law only recognizes and endorse execution of same, so far as validity, existence and legal value of same was concerned, it was purely within domain and province of Civil Court (having jurisdiction over matter)--Civil suit was pending adjudication and alternate statutory remedy of appeal had not been availed--Efficaciousness of alternate remedy was one of factors to be considered--Remedy of appeal before administrative higher fora in hierarchy of relevant law could not always be considered as an efficacious alternate remedy--If it was established that any act of functionary had taken a track which is in opposition with scheme of law, countermand of such instrument under judicial review was proper treatment of contra jus orders--Trite that an act required to be performed in a specific manner could only be done in a such way otherwise it carried no weight in eye of law and is regarded as nullity in eye of law--Petition accepted. [Pp. 207 & 208] A, B & C Mr. Mohammad Yaqoob Khan Mughal, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. Mushtaq Ahmed Janjua, Advocate for Respondents No. 3 & 4. Date of hearing. 6.5.2025. Judgment The petitioner by filing the instant constitutional petition is seeking annulment of the orders of Sub Registrar and Registrar dated…