Specifi relief act
KOTESWARA RAO
(Querist) 22 April 2012
This query is : Resolved
Respected sir,
I filed the suit for the specific performance, My client gave the amount of Rs: 20,00,000/- byway of cheque, at Axis bank, vendor en cashed the cheque also at the in the oral agreement and got the receipt for the vendor on the white paper with affixed the revenue stamp. at this state the defendant's advocate argued that -- at Latest decision of Supreme court- ON 2012 DECISION, the receipt should be registered as per Sec-17, - SO PLEASE GIVE ME THE LATEST DECISIONS OF SUPREME COURT -- FOR NON REGISTRATION OF THE RECEIPT- REGISTRATION IS NOT REQUIRED-- PLEASE THE GIVE ME THE LATEST DECISIONS- AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE- WE ARE THE PLAINTIFF- WE GOT THE RECEIPT WITH AFFIXED THE REVENUE STAMP- THANKING YOU SIR- KOTESWARA RAO, ADVOCATE, RAJAHMUNDRY
adv. rajeev ( rajoo )
(Expert) 22 April 2012
It is a receipt issued by the defendant for having receipt of money to sell the proprty, it is not an agreement. The receipt itself shows that you have paid the amount in advance. Registration of cash receipt is not necessary. If there was an agreement of sale, it could have been regd., So make an interpretation between cash receipt and agreement of sale. 2012 does not applicable to this
Anirudh
(Expert) 22 April 2012
Can you please clarify as to what is the 2012 SC Decision that is being talked about?
Adv.R.P.Chugh
(Expert) 22 April 2012
Dear Collleague,
As per S.17 (1)(c) which is as follows "(c) non- testamentary instruments which acknowledge the receipt or payment of any consideration on account of the creation, declaration, assignment, limitation or extinction of any such right, title or interest;" are compulsorily registrable, and in absence of registration they :-
i) Don't affect the property it concerns (i.e does not create any R/T/interest;
ii) Not receivable in evidence (S.49 IRA)
This provision was always there has nothing to do with SC judgment, however there is still a silver lining to this : Proviso to S.49 provides that "this unregistered reciept + bank statement can still be used for a collateral purpose or for specific performance of the contract, however not for the purpose of retaining possession under Part Performance (S.17(1A)
Shonee Kapoor
(Expert) 22 April 2012
Hmmm, I agree with Ld. Bharat.
Regards,
Shonee Kapoor
harassed.by.498a@gmail.com
SAINATH DEVALLA
(Expert) 22 April 2012
Dear Koteswara Rao garu,
You are not clear in your interpretation of your query,kindly aloborate,I could not catch 2012 SC decision.Well envisaged by Bharatji.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 22 April 2012
Mr. Chug rightly explained the provisions but your query seems incomplete with regard to facts.
Anirudh
(Expert) 22 April 2012
Whoever has been able to relate to the SC decision of 2012 which is being referred to her, why don't you indicate what is the decision about?
Why this little piece of information is not forthcoming. Is it only one way traffic in this LCI?
