https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306830 The court allowed the writ petition, directing the second respondent to register the sale agreement dated 2018, despite the existence of a prior agreement with Ganesan. The court emphasized the importance of legal clarity and adherence to specific provisions when denying registration based on prior agreements, stating that the second respondent lacked grounds to refuse registration solely on the basis of the previous agreement. This ruling ensures the petitioner can proceed with the new sale agreement, highlighting the significance of fulfilling all necessary formalities for registration. en-us Thu, 07 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Mar 2023 01:20:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306830 The court allowed the writ petition, directing the second respondent to register the sale agreement dated 2018, despite the existence of a prior agreement with Ganesan. The court emphasized the importance of legal clarity and adherence to specific provisions when denying registration based on prior agreements, stating that the second respondent lacked grounds to refuse registration solely on the basis of the previous agreement. This ruling ensures the petitioner can proceed with the new sale agreement, highlighting the significance of fulfilling all necessary formalities for registration. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 07 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306830