Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 18 (0.26 seconds)
221St Report On Need For Speedy Justice – Some Suggestions cites

Amar Nath And Others vs State Of Haryana & Others on 29 July, 1977

(c) Transfer of Property Act 1882 2 See, for example, S. Kuppuswami Rao v. The King, AIR 1949 FC 1; Amar Nath v. State of Haryana, (1977) 4 SCC 137; Madhu Limaye v. State of Maharashtra, [1978] 1 SCR 749; V. C. Shukla v. State through C.B.I., AIR 1980 SC 962; K. K. Patel v. State of Gujarat, (2000) 6 SCC 195; State v. N.M.T. Joy Immaculate, (2004) 5 SCC 729 22 2.16 When a person purchases immovable property, the sale deed is required to be registered. Normally, the vendor and the vendee show cash transaction for sale consideration and an endorsement is also made by the Registrar/Sub-Registrar to that effect. But when a person has to play a foul game, the major portion of the sale consideration is shown to have been paid outside and not before the Registrar/Sub-Registrar and it gives rise to unnecessary litigation, both criminal and civil.3 With the vast network of Banks and the growing awareness amongst the common people, a time has come to make it mandatory that the consideration for every sale shall be paid through Bank Draft. This will check frivolous transactions as well as unnecessary litigation.
Supreme Court of India Cites 24 - Cited by 775 - S M Ali - Full Document
1   2 Next