https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309729 A mere recital in an agreement to sell that possession was delivered does not, by itself, prove actual delivery of possession; the fact of possession must be established by evidence. On the facts found, no actual delivery of possession was proved, and the recital was treated as insufficient to attract compulsory registration under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908. The agreement therefore did not require registration for the purpose of the specific performance suit, and the maintainability of the suit was upheld. The challenge to the decree failed, and the decree for specific performance remained undisturbed. en-us Thu, 14 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Sep 2023 16:09:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309729 A mere recital in an agreement to sell that possession was delivered does not, by itself, prove actual delivery of possession; the fact of possession must be established by evidence. On the facts found, no actual delivery of possession was proved, and the recital was treated as insufficient to attract compulsory registration under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908. The agreement therefore did not require registration for the purpose of the specific performance suit, and the maintainability of the suit was upheld. The challenge to the decree failed, and the decree for specific performance remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 14 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309729