Rubi Singh And Others v. State Of Haryana And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-34690-2025 Date of Decision: 11.03.2026 RUBI SINGH AND OTHERS

...Petitioners

Vs.

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. Chetan Mittal, Sr. Advocate with Siddharth Batra, Advocate, Mr. Abhinav Sood, Advocate and Mr. Mayank, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Vivek Chauhan, Addl. A.G. Haryana Mr. Satyapal Jain, Addl. Solicitor General (through V.C.) with Ms. Meghna Malik, Sr. Panel Counsel for respondent-ED *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

The petitioners through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India are seeking direction to respondent to register their sale deeds.

2.

The petitioners are claiming that respondent No.3-Tehsildar Faridabad is not registering their sale deeds on the ground that Enforcement Directorate has passed provisional attachment order with respect to property in question. The adjudicating authority has set aside attachment order, thus, there is no question to withhold registration of sale deeds of property in question.

DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.03.11 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-34690-2025 -23.

Learned counsel for the respondent-Enforcement Directorate submit that they have no objection if Tehsildar, Faridabad registers sale deeds of property in question. They have found petitioners genuine home buyers.

4.

Learned State counsel submits that Tehsildar, Faridabad would reconsider the matter and pass an appropriate order before 31.03.2026.

5.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners agrees with the aforesaid arrangement.

6.

In the wake of statement of both sides, the petition stands disposed of.

7.

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE March 11, 2026 Deepak DPA Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.03.11 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document