Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Advocates
Judges
Acts
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Advocates
Judges
Acts
Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

The petitioner, S. Gandhi @ Nickel Kumar, entered into a sale agreement with the fourth respondent, B. Jaykumar, for the purchase of the property described as R.S.No.155/2 of Villianur Revenue Village, Puducherry. Alleging that the subject property was being alienated by third parties, the petitioner made a representation dated 06.03.2023 to the first and second respondents, the District Registrar and Sub Registrar respectively, requesting them to refrain from registering any documents related to the property. The petitioner filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus to forbid the respondents from registering any documents pending disposal of his representation.

Legal Issues Presented

  1. Whether an agreement to sell an immovable property creates any transferable interest or title in the property prior to execution of a registered deed of conveyance.
  2. Whether the official respondents can be restrained from registering documents relating to the property based on the petitioner's representation as a sale agreement holder.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent Rule or Principle Cited For Application by the Court
Suraj Lamp and Industries Private Ltd. through Director Vs. State of Haryana and another, 2012 (1) SCC 656 Clarification that an agreement to sell does not fulfill the requirements of Sections 54 and 55 of the Transfer of Property Act and does not confer title or interest in immovable property. The court relied on this decision to confirm that the petitioner, holding only an agreement to sell, does not have any transferable interest in the property.
Narandas Karsondas Vs. S.A. Kamtam & Another, 1977 (3) SCC 247 Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act explicitly states that a contract of sale does not create any interest or charge on the property itself. The court applied this precedent to emphasize that ownership passes only upon execution of a registered deed of sale, not by an agreement to sell.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court began by noting that the petitioner is not the owner but only the holder of a sale agreement, which does not create any proprietary interest in the immovable property under Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The court extensively quoted Section 54, which mandates that transfer of ownership of immovable property valued over Rs.100 must be made by a registered deed of conveyance, and that a contract of sale (agreement to sell) does not itself create any interest or charge on the property.

Relying on authoritative Supreme Court decisions, particularly Suraj Lamp and Industries Pvt. Ltd. and Narandas Karsondas, the court underscored that an agreement to sell is insufficient to confer title or interest and falls short of the statutory requirements for conveyance. The court highlighted that while an agreement to sell creates a personal obligation, it does not affect ownership or create any transferable interest in the property.

Consequently, the petitioner's claim based solely on the agreement to sell could not be sustained, and the court declined to interfere with the registration process based on the petitioner's representation.

Holding and Implications

The writ petition is dismissed.

The direct effect of this decision is that the petitioner, as a holder of only an agreement to sell, has no enforceable proprietary interest in the subject property, and the respondents are not restrained from registering documents related to it. No costs were imposed. The court did not establish any new precedent but reaffirmed established principles under the Transfer of Property Act and relevant Supreme Court rulings.

To access the original judgment, please Sign In or Subscribe.

    S.Gandhi @ Nickel Kumar v. The District Registrar,

    W.P.No.9077 of 2023

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

    DATED : 31.03.2023

    CORAM

    THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

    W.P.No.9077 of 2023 S. Gandhi @ Nickel Kumar ... Petitioner

    Vs.

    1.The District Registrar, Registration Department, Office of District Registrar, Saram, Government of Puducherry. 2.The Sub Registrar,

    Sub Registrar Office,

    Villianur, Puducherry.

    3.The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (1),

    Villupuram,

    Villupuram District.

    4.B. Jaykumar ...

    Respondents

    PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents 1 and 2 from making any registration pending disposal of petitioner's representation dated 06.03.2023.

    1

    For Petitioner : Mr.K.S. Ilangovan For R1 to R3 : Mr.P. Sathish, Additional Government Pleader

    ORDER

    The petitioner herein, had entered into a sale agreement with one B. Jayakumar (the fourth respondent herein), proposing to purchase the property comprised in R.S.No.155/2 of Villianur Revenue Village, within the Puducherry Registration District, Villianur Sub Registration District, under Patta No.28 (hereinafter referred to as the subject property). Alleging that the subject property is sought to be alienated by the third parties, he had made a representation dated 06.03.2023 to the respondents 1 and 2, to refrain from registering any document thereof. The present Writ Petition is for a direction to the official respondents to consider his representation.

    2. Admittedly, the petitioner herein is not an owner of the subject property but is only a sale agreement holder. An agreement to sell does

    2

    not create any interest on the proposed vendee over the suit property. Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, provides that the title in an immoveable property, valued at more than Rs.100/-, can be conveyed only by executing a registered Deed of Conveyance and that a Contract for Sale of an immoveable property will not by itself create any interest or charge on such property.

    3. Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, reads as follows:-

    ""Sale" defined:-"Sale" is a transfer of ownership in exchange for a price paid or promised or part-paid and part-promised.

    Sale how made- Such transfer, in the case of tangible immoveable property of the value of one hundred rupees and upwards, or in the case of a reversion or other intangible thing, can be made only by a registered instrument.

    In the case of tangible immoveable property of a value less than one hundred rupees, such transfer may be made either by a registered instrument or by delivery of the property.

    Delivery of tangible immoveable property takes

    3

    place when the seller places the buyer, or such person as he directs, in possession of the property. Contract for sale.-A contract for the sale of immovable property is a contract that a sale of such property shall take place on terms settled between the parties.

    It does not, of itself, create any interest in or charge on such property."

    4. The Hon'ble Apex Court in a decision in 'Suraj Lamp and Industries Private Ltd., through Director Vs. State of Haryana and another' reported in '2012 (1) SCC 656', had dealt with the scope of an agreement of sale and while relying upon another decision in 'Narandas Karsondas Vs. S.A. Kamtam & Another' reported in '1977 (3) SCC 247', had held that an agreement to sell will not qualify to the requirements of Sections 54 & 55 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and as such, it will not confer any title nor transfer any interest in the immovable property. The relevant portion of the order reads as follows:-

    "16.Section 54 of TP Act makes it clear that a contract of sale, that is, an agreement of sale does not, of itself, create any interest in or charge on such property.

    4

    This Court in Narandas Karsondas v. S.A. Kamtam and Anr. (1977) 3 SCC 247, observed:

    32.A contract of sale does not of itself create any interest in, or charge on, the property. This is expressly declared in Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act. (See Rambaran Prosad

    v. Ram Mohit Hazra) [1967]1 SCR 293. The fiduciary character of the personal obligation created by a contract for sale is recognised in Section 3 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, and in Section 91 of the Trusts Act. The personal obligation created by a contract of sale is described in Section 40 of the Transfer of Property Act as an obligation arising out of contract and annexed to the ownership of property, but not amounting to an interest or easement therein.

    33.In India, the word `transfer' is defined with reference to the word `convey'. The word `conveys' in section 5 of Transfer of Property Act is used in the wider sense of conveying ownership.

    37. ...that only on execution of conveyance ownership passes from one party to another...." 19.Any contract of sale (agreement to sell) which is not a registered deed of conveyance (deed of sale) would fall short of the requirements of sections 54 and 55 of TP Act and will not confer any title nor transfer any interest in an immovable property (except to the limited right granted under section 53A of TP Act). According to TP Act, an

    5

    agreement of sale, whether with possession or without possession, is not a conveyance. Section 54 of TP Act enacts that sale of immovable property can be made only by a registered instrument and an agreement of sale does not create any interest or charge on its subject matter."

    5. Thus, when Sections 54 & 55 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, does not confer any title or transfer any interest on the immoveable property, the claim of the petitioner, being a sale agreement holder, cannot be sustained.

    6. Accordingly the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.

    31.03.2023

    Speaking/Non-speaking Order Index: Yes/No

    Internet: Yes/No

    Neutral Citation: Yes/No

    Sni

    6

    To 1.The District Registrar, Registration Department, Office of District Registrar, Saram, Government of Puducherry. 2.The Sub Registrar,

    Sub Registrar Office,

    Villianur, Puducherry.

    3.The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (1),

    Villupuram,

    Villupuram District.

    7

    M.S.RAMESH, J.

    Sni

    W.P.No.9077 of 2023

    31.03.2023

    8

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    S.Gandhi @ Nickel Kumar v. The District Registrar,
    (Mar 31, 2023)