' This is a suo mow revision in exercise of the powers conferred by para. 29 of Land Reforms Regulation, 1972, and initiated in consequence of a note recorded by the Inspection Team of the Federal Land Commission, wherein the following objections have been raised:- "(1) The mutation of the gift has been sanctioned by the Head Munshi who lacked powers in person as required under section 16 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act.
(2)The sale price of the land measuring 100-10 acres alienated by way of sale being more than Rs, 100 its sale by way of oral statement is against the mandatory provisions of section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act and section 17 of the Registration Act.
(3)There is reasonable doubt that the alienation by way of sale is antedated as it is in the last entries of the specified period.
(4)That both the mutations have not been sanctioned in Jalse-i-Am thereby contravening the mandatory provisions of section 42 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act."
2. The objection at para. 1 (1) supra is totally unsound and incorrect. The Head Munshi is duly authorised by Notification No, 11319/68-1296 E (F) VI dated 18-3.69 issued by the Board of Revenue, West Pakistan which reads as under:- "In exercise of the powers conferred by subsections (2) and (3) of section 16 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967 (West Pakistan Act No, XVII of 1967), the Board of Revenue is pleased to confer all the powers of an Assistant Collector of the Second Grade under the said Act on all persons who for the time being are holding office of Head Munshi, provided they have passed the Departmental Examination prescribed for them under the relevant Rules, and to direct that they shall exercise the said powers within the area of their respective jurisdiction."
'The Deputy Commissioner, Tharparkar has vide his Order Nos. 1/4405 dated 4-11-71 and 1/5810 dated 15-11-71 specifically notified the jurisdiction of the Head Munshis of certain talukas including Jamesabad. The mutations sanctioned by the Head Munshi are therefore intra vises.
3. (a) The alienations of land by way of sale on oral statement, were allowed for the purpose of entries in the Record of Rights by GR. No, 8702 dated 15-9-1914 and No, 2055/33/RD, dated 14-2- 1935. Para. 6 of Standing Order No, 17, and para. 15 (a) of Village Revenue Accounts for Sind refers.
There is superabundance of evidence to show that in Sind, this practice has continued uninterrupted for the very long time and it has acquired, by custom and usage inasmuch as by Regulation, the status of settled law. However, for the purpose of entries in the Record of Rights, oral transactions can be admitted under section 42 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967.
(b) Whereas section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act requires registration of the sale deeds and documents, section 53 (A) is an exception to the provisions. It reads:- "53-A. Part performance.-Where any person contracts to transfer for consideration any immovable property by writing signed by him or on his behalf from which the terms necessary to constitute the transfer can be ascertained with reasonable certainty, and the transferee has performed or is willing to perform his part of the contract, then, notwithstanding that the contract, though required to be registered, has not been registered, or where there is an instrument of transfer, that the transfer has not been completed in the manner prescribed therefor by the law for the time being in force, the transferor or any person claiming under him shall be debarred from enforcing against the transferee and persons claiming under him any right in respect of the property of which the transferee has taken or continued in possession other than right expressly provided by the terms of the contract: ' Provided that nothing in this section shall affect the rights of a transferee for consideration who has no notice of the contract or of the p performance thereof."
' Some rights or interest in land would accrue to the transferee despite the fact that the sale is by way of oral statement provided that the following two conditions are met:
(i) That the contract to transfer immovable property for consideration, is in writing.
(ii) That in performance of that contract, the possession of property has been duly transferred to the transferee.
' From the evidence adduced, it is clear that these conditions have been satisfied and thereby the transferee has acquired rights and interest in the land which must be protected, even though the sale is not registered.
4. There is no justification for the remarks at para. 1 (3) supra, and the objection is therefore, dismissed.
5. As far as the question of holding a Jalse-i-Am is concerned I have already ruled elsewhere, that it is an administrative function of the revenue authorities to hold the "Jalsa" and any failure on their part should not, and indeed cannot, transport any blame to the declarant. The declarant having done all that was required of him by law, cannot be made to suffer on account of acme major laxity by a minor officer of the revenue.
6. The alienation by way of sale on oral statement is a bona fide transaction and the notice is, therefore, vacated.