.... 8. On the other hand, Mr. J.M. Gandhi, Advocate appearing for the respondent submitted that a proper reading of Section 55(1) of the aforesaid Act would show that even an agreement for period of less than one year was not exempted from the requirement of registration. It was submitted that non- obstante clause with which Section 55(1) starts, demonstrates that the exemption available under Section 18 of...for less than one year, like the aforesaid agreement in the present case is mandatorily required to be registered under the Registration Act, as per Section 55(1) of the Rent Act. It also needs to be considered whether the registration of such a document pertaining to a period of less than one year is optional under Section 18 of..., since the registration of an agreement of the nature with which this Court is concerned in the present case, is required to be registered under the Registration Act, all the provisions of the Registration Act, including Sections 17 and 18 thereof would squarely apply. Since the period for which possession of suit shop was given to the respondent under the said agreement was only 11 months and clearly less than one year, such an agreement was not compulsorily registrable under Section 17...