https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276416 The court upheld the validity of the agreement and the compromise decree in a property possession suit, dismissing the appeal with costs. The court found that the agreement did not require registration under the Indian Registration Act as it was intended to be embodied in a court decree, which was registered. The appellant's argument that the agreement needed registration for immovable property rights was rejected, as the document explicitly stated it should be part of a court decree. The court concluded that the compromise decree was valid and enforceable. en-us Thu, 10 Aug 1939 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Nov 2018 12:26:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276416 The court upheld the validity of the agreement and the compromise decree in a property possession suit, dismissing the appeal with costs. The court found that the agreement did not require registration under the Indian Registration Act as it was intended to be embodied in a court decree, which was registered. The appellant's argument that the agreement needed registration for immovable property rights was rejected, as the document explicitly stated it should be part of a court decree. The court concluded that the compromise decree was valid and enforceable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 10 Aug 1939 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276416