registration act Archives

Sale certificate to auction purchaser is mere evidence of title & does not require registration under S. 17(1) of Registration Act: SC reiterates

“Mere filing under Section 89(4) of the Registration Act itself is sufficient when a copy of the sale certificate is forwarded by the authorised officer to the registering authority. As long as the sale certificate remains as it is, it is not compulsorily registrable. It is only when the auction purchaser uses the certificate for some other purpose that the requirement of payment of stamp duty, etc. would arise.”

Op Eds OP. ED.

To Attest or Not to Attest: Understanding Why Attestation is Not Required for All Transfers under the Transfer of Property Act, 1882

by Alind Gupta*

Case Briefs High Courts

Scope of powers to District Registrars under Registration Act cannot be expanded for adjudication of civil disputes or rights: Madras HC

“District Registrar is duty bound to draw a distinction between the summary proceeding and the trial nature proceedings with reference to the Registration Act and the Code of Civil Procedure”

Experts Corner Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas

Sale of Immovable Property and Deeming Fiction under the Registration Act — A Comparative Analysis

by Ajit Warrier*
Cite as: 2024 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 18

Cases Reported SCC Weekly

2023 SCC Vol. 10 Part 5

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — S. 11 — Res judicata: Only determinations which are essential or fundamental to the substantive decision, and

Law made Easy

Where there is a Will, there is Inheritance Law

by Spenta Havewala Kapadia*

A Rundown on Law Relating to Wills, Letters of Administration, Succession Certificates and Heirship Certificates

Op Eds OP. ED.

Sale Certificate under SARFAESI Act—Whether Registration Mandatory?

by Prashant Tripathi†

unregistered agreement to sell as evidence

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Unregistered agreement to sell an admissible evidence in a suit for specific performance; Supreme Court upholds Madras High Court Judgment

Supreme Court said that as per proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908 an unregistered document affecting immovable property may be received as evidence of a contract in a suit for specific performance under Chapter-II of the Specific Relief Act, 1877, or as evidence of any collateral transaction not required to be effected by registered instrument, subject to Section 17(1A) of the Registration Act.

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Merely writing “cancelled” on registered power of attorney wouldn’t make it null and void: Supreme Court

Supreme Court: The Division Bench of K.M. Joseph* and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ., held that mere writing the word “cancelled” or drawing

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Not mandatory to register partition document only detailing how the properties are to be dealt with in future: SC

Supreme Court: The bench of L. Nageswara Rao, BR Gavai and BV Nagarathna*, JJ has held that a document of partition which

Case Briefs High Courts

Law on Fraud | Registration of document by public officer while discharging public duty: A Fraudulent activity? AP HC decides

Andhra Pradesh High Court: M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J., expressed that, “If a party to the document wants to annul the document, he

Case Briefs High Courts

Bom HC | Does a Registering Officer has right to decide whether person presenting document for registration has marketable title or not? Court answers

Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of A.S. Chandurkar and Amit B. Borkar, JJ., addressees the present matter while explaining the existence

Case Briefs High Courts

Chh HC | Sub-Registrar appointed under Registration Act is not empowered to make roving enquiry qua title of vendor; FIR against Sub-Registrar quashed

Chhattisgarh High Court: Sanjay K. Agarwal, J. allowed a petition filed by a Sub-Registrar duly appointed under Section 6 of the Registration Act,

Case Briefs Supreme Court

In absence of express provision under Registration Act, 1908, it is not open to assume that Sub-Registrar would be competent to cancel the registration

Supreme Court: In the matter where the moot question before the Court was that whether the Sub-Registrar (Registration) has authority to cancel