India and its metropolises are a booming real estate market. All those who have a decent earning capacity want to invest in an asset that gives the security of high returns. In general, the most important and important document regarding real estate is the sales contract. Such a sales contract must be registered in a particular seat in the city. Today, we will discuss the validity of an unregured sales contract and count as a valid document without registration. A similar topic came for the Supreme Court`s review in Garware Wall Ropes v Coastal Marine Constructions – Engineering Ltd (2019), after an appeal of a Bombay High Court decision. Coastal Marine had invoked arbitration proceedings to challenge the termination of a subcontract awarded by Garware, and an arbitration tribunal was formed despite Garware`s objection that the arbitration agreement had been insufficiently stamped under the Maharashtra Stamp Act of 1958. The ruling in the SMS Tea Estates case was not followed, although the provisions of the Maharashtra Stamp Act and stamp law were similar in the processing of under-stamped documents. 3. To revoke the contract, the potential buyer must appear before the Registrar.
You can only sell the land to another buyer after the contract has been cancelled. In the absence of such a provision, there is ambiguity as to the validity and application of these unregistered ATSes, which are now legally required to be forcibly registered. Parliament must respond to the aforementioned ambiguity with an appropriate amendment to the law. Alternatively, the national governments concerned could address the issue in the internal regulation. In the absence of a law, developers are well within their rights to defend themselves if, on the basis of an unregistered ATS, that the content of such an ATS cannot be read for the purposes of evidence, according to Section 49 of the Registration Act. Strictly speaking, Section 49 refers only to the non-registration of documents that are required to be registered mandatorly, either under Section 17 of the Registration Act or TPA. Section 13 of the Act is not explicitly in Section 49. However, it is questionable whether the purpose underlying the forced registration of a document is to impose a consequence of its non-registration and that, in this context, the non-registration provided for in Section 13 of the Act will follow that defined in Section 49 of the Registration Act.
that the Allottees cannot avail themselves of such a document (UNregistered ATS) and request its application because of the lack of registration. In the absence of a provision of the law, it may be difficult to rebut such a legal defence. 2. As I requested in my previous article, is there a revocation clause in the above agreements that does not meet the terms of payment? The Apex court questioned whether an agreement to sell unreg registered security could be considered under the condition of Section 49 of the Registration Act of 1908.