R. Hemalatha Vs Kashthuri (Supreme Court of India)
The Supreme Court considered an appeal filed by the original defendant against the judgment of the Madras High Court dated 1 February 2022, whereby the High Court allowed a revision petition, set aside the Trial Court’s order in I.A. No.159 of 2017 in O.S. No.199 of 2014, and directed that the unregistered Agreement to Sell dated 10 September 2013 be received in evidence in a suit for specific performance.
The original plaintiff had instituted O.S. No.199 of 2014 seeking specific performance of the Agreement to Sell dated 10 September 2013. During the plaintiff’s evidence, the Trial Court framed a preliminary issue regarding the admissibility of the agreement. The defendant contended that, following the Tamil Nadu Amendment Act No.29 of 2012 to the Registration Act, agreements relating to the sale of immovable property valued at ₹100 or more were compulsorily registrable and, being unregistered, the agreement could not be admitted in evidence. The plaintiff relied upon Section 49(a) and (c) of the Registration Act and submitted that an unregistered agreement to sell could nevertheless be received in evidence as evidence of a contract in a suit for specific performance. The Trial Court accepted the defendant’s objection and held the agreement inadmissible.
