SARDAR KAMALJIT SINGH Vs. SURESH CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) None present for the Respondent despite service.

(2.) This writ petition is directed against the order dated 28-7-2009, whereby, the learned trial Court allowed the application of the Defendant-Respondent and held that the agreement in question dated 6-1 -2005 on the basis of which the specific performance was sought by the Plaintiff-Petitioner could not be admitted in evidence since the same was not registered as per Section 17 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that since in the agreement Annex. 1 dated 6-1-2005 there is no stipulation for handing over the possession of the plot in question to the Petitioner-Plaintiff, such agreement is not required to be registered as per Section 17 (1) (f) of the Indian Registration Act, whereas, the learned trial Court relying upon the provisions of Sections 17 (1)(a) and 17 (1)(b) of the Act has held that said document was required to be registered for the purpose of Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. He submits that earlier also the learned trial Court decided issue No. 8 against the Plaintiff and asked the Petitioner-Plaintiff to deposit full stamp duty of Rs. 97,900/- including penalty to make such document admissible in evidence, which was duly paid by the Petitioner on 16-4-2009 and later on the Defendant moved this application for the said document to be registered, which has been allowed by the learned trial Court wrongly.