Unregistered Agreement To Sell


    There are a large number of projects in progress in which the developer may have asked the buyer for more than 10% of the cost of the property under the ATS and may have been donated by him, which were (in the absence of requirement) and are still not registered. The Real Estate Act (Regulation – Development) 2016 (law) was notified in full on May 1, 2017. Section 3 of the Act requires the registration of a real estate project by the developer when the developer intends to promote, market, reserve or sell a property in the aforementioned project. Registration is also required for ongoing projects for which the developer has not received a graduation certificate. Therefore, the law applies not only to future projects, but also to ongoing projects for which construction began before May 1, 2017. For some ongoing projects, an ATS would have clearly been implemented to cover the rights, obligations and obligations of the parties, and the purchasers would have made partial payments in exchange for a block contribution. The amount of payment depends on the time frame chosen by the allottee, i.e. the construction link or the fixed time frame. In this context, Section 13 of the Act now provides for mandatory registration of the ATS.

    2. These unregistered documents may, however, be used as collateral evidence, as provided for in Section 49 of the Registration Act. Hon`ble Court held that Section 17 (1A) simply stated that such an unregauble contract could not be put into service within the meaning of Section 53 (A) of the Property Transfer Act of 1882. Section 17 (1A) of the Registration Act, 1908, does not prohibit, in a few words or with the necessary intent, the filing of an action for a defined benefit based on a non-registered sale agreement, that the surrender of the property be registered or executed for the benefit of a person to whom possession is delivered, and provided that Section 49 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, responds to an argument to the contrary. Hon`ble Court has decided that: (a) a lawsuit for a defined benefit based on an unregistered contract/sale with a partial performance clause of the contract by delivery of ownership or executed with a person already in possession is not dismissed because of the lack of registration of the contract or agreement; (b) the omission of section 49 of the Registration Act legitimizes such a contract to the extent that, even if it is not registered, it may form the basis for legal action for a specified benefit and be provided as evidence of the agreement or partial performance of a contract. [8] …. Ownership of the land in the dispute was delivered to the plaintiff at the time of the sale of the agreement. The appeal for the specific execution of the agreement not registered to…) 8 Jasvir Singh 2013 (2) CPR (Civil) 780, finding that an appeal for a defined benefit on the basis of unregistered documents cannot be dismissed for failing to register the agreement … are themselves a contract to transfer ownership.