Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (3.64 seconds)Section 17 in The Registration Act, 1908 [Entire Act]
Balram Singh vs Kelo Devi on 23 September, 2022
10. The judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the
petitioner are distinguishable on facts, having regard to the fact that in the
case of V. Madhusudhan Rao's referred supra, the suit was filed for partition.
In the said suit, the plaintiffs have taken a plea by way of amendment, that the
sale deed executed in favour of the defendant therein is not valid, since it is an
unregistered document. In the said circumstances, this Court observed that
the said document cannot be received in evidence even for collateral
purposes observing the possession is not a collateral transaction that is
independent or divisible from transfer recorded in the sale deed. And in
Balram Singh's case referred supra. The suit was filed for permanent
injunction by the plaintiff against the defendant, vendor, basing on an
unregistered agreement of sale dated 23.03.1996. In the facts of the said
case, since the plaintiff without seeking specific performance of the agreement
of sale filed suit for injunction in the said circumstances, the Hon'ble Apex
Court observed that the suit for permanent injunction is not maintainable,
without seeking specific performance of the agreement of sale, when the
defendant had specifically asked for delivery of possession through counter
claim. Under the said circumstances, the Apex Court has observed the
unregistered agreement of sale cannot be received in evidence even for
collateral purposes.
M/S K.B.Saha And Sons Pvt. Ltd vs M/S Development Consultant Ltd on 12 May, 2008
"34. From the principles laid down in the various decisions
of this Court and the High Courts, as referred to hereinabove,
it is evident that :-
K. Ramamoorthi vs C. Surendranatha Reddy on 27 July, 2012
8. And on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
K. Ramamoorthi Vs. C. Surendranatha Reddy4, wherein it is observed as
under:-
Queen-Empress vs Rama Tevan And Ors. on 30 March, 1892
b) An unregistered mortgage deed requiring registration may be
received as evidence to prove the money debt, provided, the
mortgage deed contains a personal covenant by the mortgagor to
pay (See: Queen-Empress v Rama Tevan20, P.V.M.Kunhu Moidu v
T.Madhava Menon21 and Vani v Bani, (96) 20 Bom. 553).
Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Pulaka Veetil Muthalakulangara Kunhu ... vs Thiruthipalli Madhava Menon And Ors. on 12 January, 1909
b) An unregistered mortgage deed requiring registration may be
received as evidence to prove the money debt, provided, the
mortgage deed contains a personal covenant by the mortgagor to
pay (See: Queen-Empress v Rama Tevan20, P.V.M.Kunhu Moidu v
T.Madhava Menon21 and Vani v Bani, (96) 20 Bom. 553).
V.Madhusudhan Rao And 7 Others vs S.Nirmala Bai And 4 Others on 6 March, 2019
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner relying on the decision of
the Apex Court in the case Balram Singh Vs. Kelo Devi1, and the decision of
this Court in the case of V. Madhusudhan Rao & Ors. Vs. S. Nirmala Bai &
Ors2., contends that the suit filed for permanent injunction, without seeking for
specific relief of execution of the sale deed, the suit for injunction on the basis
of an unregistered agreement of sale is not maintainable and so also the said
unregistered agreement cannot be exhibited in evidence. The contention of
the defendant as stated in the written statement is as under:-
1