1. MUSHIR ALAM, J. --- The petitioner claims to have purchased the property purportedly from one Anees Ahmad who in turn had claimed right as per village from VII deriving title from one Mst.
2. Sarwari Begum through registered Sale-Deed dated 20.11.2003 The petitioner claims demarcation of the property. Comments were called from the Mukhtiarkar concerned. It is stated in the comments that though originally entry No. 1913 appears to be in the name of Mst. Sarwari Begurn widow of Hon: It. M. Ayub which has beentransferred from the name of R.I Bahadur Khubchand and there appears to be some interpolation over entry No. 1913 dated 7.1.1988 and according to the comments of Mukhtiarkar the entry is absolutely fictitious and therefore the transaction made on the basis of entry No. 285 VF-VII and all subsequent entries are not tenable and need to be cancelled. The respondents should have initiated the action for cancellation of such entry without waiting for such order of the Court but after notice to the claimants in the petition. Since there is a dispute as to the title drawn be the petitioner. We do not feel appropriate to issue any direction in case of doubtful case. It may be observed that if the foundation is fraudulent the entire superstructure made by a . Registered instrument is of no consequence. The petitioner if deems appropriate may seek remedy from the Civil Court, but not against the officer who issued the NOC for Sale of the property on the basis of such doubtful entry. The petition is accordingly dismissed alongwith all pending applications .