9911796707
TMI Blog1926 (6) TMI 1X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e subject) * * * * I have agreed to sell the above-mentioned property for ₹ 10,000 and the sum of interest, to be paid to the Government, to Indar Singh, son of Hira Singh, Havildar, caste Jat Dhami, ocupation cultivation, abadkar and resident of Chak No. 188, Rakh Branch, Tahsil Lyallpur, who has agreed to purohase this land merely for the sake of Lambardarship. Out of the sale money I have at present received Rs, 1,000 by way of earnest money, ₹ 9,000 is agreed to be received before the Sub-Registrar, Lyallpur, fit the time of the completion of the sale and registration. The expenses, incurred in connection with the execution and completion of the sale-deed, shall be borne by the vendee and mys ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing been registered, could not be received in evidence in terms of Section 49 of Act XVI of 1908. He also pleaded that in respect of undue influence exercised at the time of the making of the agreement specific performance should be refused. The trial Judge held that the document did not require to be registered, but held that undue influence had been proved. On appeal the Appeal Court agreed with the trial Judge that the document did not require to be registered, but disagreed as to the other matter. They therefore decreed specific performance. The sole question in this appeal, which is ex parte, is, therefore, whether the document in question required to be registered. As the question is an important one, it will be well to trace the hist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rds to or in immovable property, but merely creating a right to obtain another document, which will, when executed, create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish any such right, title or interest. 3. This change having been made, there came to be raised questions as to various agreements, first as to whether they fell under Section 17 (b), and, accordingly, if they did so, whether they could be excused in respect of a, 17 (h). Examples of such cases may be found in Burjorji Cursetji Panthaki v. Mun-cherji Kuverji, (1880) I.L.R. 5 Bom. 143 where it was held that the agreement was not necessarily registrable, and Ramasami v. Ramasami (1882) I.L.R. 5 Mad. 115 where the agreement was held to be compulsorily registrable, and consequently not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly declines to accept the delivery, also for the earnest (if any) and for the coasts (if any) awarded to him of a suit to compel specific performance of the contract or to obtain a decree for its rescission. 4. Their Lordships are of opinion that the section applied to the agreement in this case, where the buyer had paid earnest money, and so far from refusing to accept delivery, was pressing for specific performance, and that the agreement did in itself create an interest and therefore did not allow of the application of Section 17 (2) (v). It was therefore compulsorily registrable under Section 17 and, not having been registered, was inadmissible in evidence under Section 49. 5. Their Lordships will, therefore, humbly advise His Maj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
