PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
SC held that an unregistered deed assigning a decree for specific performance of an agreement to sell immovable property is valid and does not attract mandatory registration under S.17(1)(e) of the Registration Act, 1908. The Court reiterated that neither an agreement of sale nor a decree for specific performance, by itself, creates or transfers right, title or interest in immovable property; such rights arise only upon execution and registration of a conveyance deed. As the underlying decree does not itself create proprietary rights, its assignment does not fall within the ambit of S.17(1)(e). Consequently, the assignment deed executed by X in favour of Y was held enforceable. The Executing Ct's refusal to execute was set aside, the HC's judgment was affirmed, and the appeal was dismissed.
SC held that an unregistered deed assigning a decree for specific performance of an agreement to sell immovable property is valid and does not attract mandatory registration under S.17(1)(e) of the Registration Act, 1908. The Court reiterated that neither an agreement of sale nor a decree for specific performance, by itself, creates or transfers right, title or interest in immovable property; such rights arise only upon execution and registration of a conveyance deed. As the underlying decree does not itself create proprietary rights, its assignment does not fall within the ambit of S.17(1)(e). Consequently, the assignment deed executed by X in favour of Y was held enforceable. The Executing Ct's refusal to execute was set aside, the HC's judgment was affirmed, and the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.