<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2021 (10) TMI 1478 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464055</link>
    <description>A document recording a completed family arrangement is not compulsorily registrable unless it itself creates, assigns, limits or extinguishes rights in immovable property. Where the arrangement was already arrived at and the writing merely memorialised the past settlement, the unregistered instrument could still be looked at for collateral purposes or as corroborative evidence, so long as that use did not defeat the statutory bar on proving the transfer itself. On the stated facts, the Khararunama and receipt were treated as records of prior adjustment rather than operative conveyances, so the objection to their admissibility was rejected in substance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2025 20:02:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=855568" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (10) TMI 1478 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464055</link>
      <description>A document recording a completed family arrangement is not compulsorily registrable unless it itself creates, assigns, limits or extinguishes rights in immovable property. Where the arrangement was already arrived at and the writing merely memorialised the past settlement, the unregistered instrument could still be looked at for collateral purposes or as corroborative evidence, so long as that use did not defeat the statutory bar on proving the transfer itself. On the stated facts, the Khararunama and receipt were treated as records of prior adjustment rather than operative conveyances, so the objection to their admissibility was rejected in substance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464055</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>