https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277503 HC dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial judge's finding that the August 1927 agreement was a sale-like contract and that an unregistered document could not create an interest in immovable property, while the covenant to level the land was collateral and admissible as a personal covenant. The court held Section 53-A inapplicable retrospectively. The matter was remanded to trial court for further inquiry into damages for breach, permitting the defendants to examine witnesses; the question of trial costs was left pending the outcome of that inquiry. en-us Thu, 28 Apr 1932 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Sep 2025 10:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277503 HC dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial judge's finding that the August 1927 agreement was a sale-like contract and that an unregistered document could not create an interest in immovable property, while the covenant to level the land was collateral and admissible as a personal covenant. The court held Section 53-A inapplicable retrospectively. The matter was remanded to trial court for further inquiry into damages for breach, permitting the defendants to examine witnesses; the question of trial costs was left pending the outcome of that inquiry. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 28 Apr 1932 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277503