Agreement to sell require registration in case delivery of possession
J S CHHABRA
(Querist) 11 September 2011
This query is : Resolved
DEAR SIR,
PL HELP ME IN A MATTER THAT WHETHER AN AGREEMENT TO SELL FOR FULL AND FINAL AMOUNT REQUIRES REGISTRATION IF THE POSSESSION OF THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN DELIVERED:
IN MY CASE AT THE TIME OF SALE OF PROPERTY OWNED BY THE SELLER WAS INHERITED BY WAY OF WILL BUT THE SAME WAS NOT TRANSFERRED IN HIS NAME IN THE RECORDS OF MUNICIPAL CORPORATION SO THAT THE SALE DEED COULD NOT BE EXECUTED BUT FULL & FINAL PAYMENT MADE VIDE AGREEMENT TO SELL AND THE POSSESSION WAS DELIVERED WITH A CONDITION THAT AS WHEN THE SELLER GET HIS NAME TRANSFERRED IN THE MUNICIPAL RECORDS THE SALE DEED WILL BE EXECUTED.
WHETHER IN THE PRESENT CASE THE AGREEMENT TO SELL REQUIRE REGISTRATION UNDER REGISTRATION ACT
REGARDS
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 11 September 2011
Please indicate the current position. Now, whether the property has been mutated in the name of the seller?
If so, whether the seller is ready to execute the Sale Deed?
Elamaran Perumal
(Expert) 11 September 2011
Hi Mr Chhabra,
In 2001, there was an amendment to Sec.17 of the Registration Act-1908, which says that an agreement to sell executed after 24th September,2001, requires compulsory registration,if the proposed buyer wants to take protection of Sec.53A of T.P.Act (Dectrine of Part Performance).
J S CHHABRA
(Querist) 11 September 2011
Mr Ramachandran, now the property has been transferred in the name of seller in the records of Municipal Corporation, but he is not ready to transfer the said property rather the buyer has filed suit for symbolic possession by way of specific performance of the contract...
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 11 September 2011
OK. I thought so.
Section 17(1A) of the Registration Act, is against the interest of the buyer in the instant case since there is delivery of possession of the immovable property in favour of the buyer, which has all the trappings of the provisions of Section 53-A of the TPA Act, since the Agreement to Sell in those conditions is required to be Compulsorily Registrable. Non-registration of the said document will definitely be hit by the provisions of Section 49 of the Registration Act, namely, the said Unregistered Agreement to sell will be not be admitted in evidence and therefore the buyer will not be able to succeed in suit for specific performance.
On the contrary, the buyer can on the basis of the said document, obtain injunction against the seller from alienating or creating any third party interests on the property.
At no point of time, the buyer should lose his possession of the property. So long as he retains the possession, he will be in a safe position.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 11 September 2011
what prevents you giving date and place of agreement and property as well as sit date.??
J S CHHABRA
(Querist) 11 September 2011
DEAR SIR/S,
SORRY I FURTHER WANT TO CONSIDER ON THIS POINT PL ADVISE ON FOLLOWING:
Section 17(2)(v) provides that a document, not in itself creating a right in immovable property of the value of Rs.100/- and upwards, but merely creating a right to obtain another document which will, when executed, create any such right, need not be registered. An agreement for sale in the usual form acknowledging receipt of earnest and providing for the execution of a regular sale-deed on payment of the balance purchase-money, is a document of this kind.
An agreement to sell in respect of an immovable property containing recites as to payment of price, is not compulsorily registerable. In the case of Muhammad Akram v Muhammad Saleem (PLD 1964 {W.P.} Lahore-490), it was held that an agreement to sell does not create any present right in property. It only recites an agreement arrived at between the parties that the plaintiff-respondent would transfer the property in dispute to the defendants-appellant either by registration of a documents of a mean of a mutations. It is not a document requiring registration.
REGARDS
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 11 September 2011
If it was simple Agreement to sell without delivery of possession, Sec. 17(2)(v) would have been applicable and consequently there would have been need for registration.
But in your case, since you also got the delivery of possession, there is part performance of the contract as envisaged in Sec. 53A of the TPA Act and therefore the agreement to sell in question requires compulsory registration in terms of Sec. 17(1A) of the Registration Act.
J S CHHABRA
(Querist) 11 September 2011
DEAR EXPERTS,
THANKS YOU ALL
REGARDS
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 11 September 2011
SLOWLY WE ARE PROGRESSING TOWARDS RIGHTNESS.
M/s. Y-not legal services
(Expert) 11 September 2011
Nice ramachandran sir.. You are rocking.. Really am admiring your way of dealing. Smoothly you are watching the querys. After collect sufficient details only giving your opinion. Nice sir. Have to learn lot from you.
