Validity Of Unregistered Agreement To Sale

. the applicant was rejected by the defendant on the ground that an unreg registered sales contract of 20.6.1967 had been concluded by Chameli in her favour and that she held it on that basis and. the defendant`s claim was the unregregized sales contract allegedly concluded by Chameli on 20.6.1967, in which it was stated that an amount of L.6,000/- was already available and. Court of Appeal that the unreg registered purchase agreement, on the basis of which the defendant asserts the right, is a false document. Otherwise, the unreg registered agreement to sell or even to regis. 3. If so, send him a letter in which you terminate the contract correctly, as suggested in my previous post, and start your sales journey again. . The court below erred in the fact that the contract of sale was not admitted as evidence.5.

I heard from an experienced lawyer for the plaintiff and recorded the document in the minutes.6. That`s right. In that case, the applicant brought an action for a specific service in respect of the sales contract of 12 May 1993. According to petent-plaintiff, the defendants entered into the contract for the sale of 1 Bigha. 3. The applicant and the applicant applied under Article 65 of the Law on Evidence that a photocopy of the contract of sale of 12 May 1993 constituted secondary evidence. The defendant. 3. Return the advance you received if the agreement does not contain a wholesale consumption clause.

1. This contract has already been terminated by Seller B after all necessary steps have been taken. It is concluded that, on the basis of the above-mentioned hon`ble Courts judgments, the unregistered sales agreement has been legitimised, given that it is situated in a legal action for a given performance and could be admissible as evidence subject to section 49 of the Registration Act. The unreg registered sales contract may form the basis for the legal recourse of a given service and may be invoked as proof of the agreement or partial performance of a contract. Section 53A is generally used for defence and not as a weapon where a defendant has the right to protect his or her right of ownership against the assignor or against his or her heir or assignee or legal representative. In the absence of such a provision, there is uncertainty as to the validity and application of these unregistered ATS, which are now legally required to be compulsorily registered. Parliament must respond to this ambiguity with an appropriate amendment to the law. In the absence of a law, developers have the right to defend themselves if they object, on the basis of an unregistered ATS, to the content of such an ATS not being read for evidential purposes, in accordance with Article 49 of the Registration Act. Strictly speaking, Article 49 deals only with the non-registration of documents. which must be registered compulsorily under Article 17 of the Registration Act or the TPA.

Section 13 of the Act is not explicitly stated in section 49. It can be argued, however, that the purpose behind the mandatory registration of a document is to impose a consequence on its refusal to register and that, in this context, the consequence of the non-registration provided for in article 13 of the Act will be that provided for in article 49 of the Registration Act. As a result, developers can take a stand when faced with infringement allottes, that Allottees cannot rely on such a document (UNREGISTED ATS) and request its application due to lack of registration. In the absence of a provision in the law, it may be difficult to legally refute such a defence. 4. If the payment was made by third parties who are not mentioned in the contract, they are free to request a refund from the seller. 1) As has already been said, it is necessary to read the sales contract concluded for consultation. The question to be answered is whether an unreg recorded purchase agreement, acquired by delivery of the property or executed for the benefit of a person in possession, namely. . . .