Agreement to Sell

Recent updates

Agreement to Sell – In the light of amended provisions of Registration Act, it is crystal clear that the agreement to sell arrived at between the parties for sale and purchase of any land does not require registration - There is no requirement that the Scribe has to have a valid licence for the purpose - Even the parties on their own can put terms and conditions with regard to sale and purchase of the land - It has come on record that the plaintiffs marked their presence on the target date but the appellant did not come forward – Defendant could not take plea qua readiness and willingness since such plea was available to the defendant only in case where the agreement to sell was admitted – Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908).    (2018-3) Punjab Law Reporter


PLR Supreme Court e@journal

 Annual subscription Rs. 1000/-

5 UPDATES A WEEK  

Full text with Headnotes through

email / WhatsApp

 

FREE with

PUNJAB LAW REPORTER

 Annual subscription Rs. 2400/-punjablawreporter@gmail.com / 9463598502  


  • Agreement to Sell - A purchaser need not sign an agreement for sale - It is only the vendor who proposes to sell the property shall sign the agreement - Therefore, an averment in the agreement for sale made by the vendor agreeing to sell the suit property to the prospective purchaser is very much valid in the eyes of law - Even otherwise, the agreement for sale need not be in writing, it can be oral as well - Just because one of the witnesses was an accused in a criminal trial and the Scribe was an Advocate for the said witness, the agreement for sale which was otherwise established, cannot be rejected. (176) P.L.R.
  •         Agreement to sell - Appellant-defendant is in possession of the suit property on the basis of agreement to sell - Well settled that agreement to sell unless enforced will not confer any title and therefore, appellant has no claim to retain his possession - Appellant cannot retain possession of the suit property by invoking the provisions of Section 53-A of the Act because he has failed to take any step in furtherance of the performance of the impugned contract between him and plaintiff - His conduct further dis-entitles him for protection under Section 53-A of the Act and he has failed to get sale deed registered in his favour in pursuance of agreement to sell - Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882) S. 53-A. (175) P.L.R.
  •         Agreement to sell - Defendants were put into possession in part performance of the agreement to sell and have not claimed any specific performance of the agreement to sell - Once the appellants-defendants have miserably failed to prove the payment of entire sale consideration, the status of the defendants is nothing but that of a  transpasser. (182) P.L.R.
  •         Agreement to sell - Defendants were put into possession in part performance of the agreement to sell and have not claimed any specific performance of the agreement to sell - Once the appellants-defendants have miserably failed to prove the payment of entire sale consideration, the status of the defendants is nothing but that of a  transpasser. (182) P.L.R.
  •         Agreement to Sell - Held to be proved - Appellant-defendant suffering from 75% disability impairment would not be a sufficient evidence to belie the contents of the agreement inasmuch as that respondent-plaintiff has been acquitted in the criminal complaint - Nothing prevented the appellant to come out with such plea by replying to the legal notice - Remaining silent on the receipt of the legal notice proved that entire story has been coined for the first time on the receipt of the notice of the suit.  (182) P.L.R.
  •         Agreement to Sell - No date mentioned - If at all considered, is an agreement of sale of allotment letter - The possession is delivered by the Improvement Trust only when all the installments are paid and the requisite documents are executed - Therefore, both the Courts below rightly held that no possession was delivered to the plaintiff, since defendant No.1 himself was not delivered the possession by Improvement Trust - Therefore, it is primarily a case of sale of allotment letter - The sale of the plot was prohibited for next ten years - Sale of the allotment letter was against the terms and conditions of the allotment letter and in such circumstances, the specific performance of the sale of allotment letter has to be refused.     (180) P.L.R. 
  •         Agreement to Sell - Suit for Mandatory Injunction - Was not maintainable without seeking relief of specific performance.        (180) P.L.R.
  •         Agreement to sell - Will not confer a title on a person in whose favour such an agreement has been executed -  Such an agreement/writing would not transfer the title in immovable property in favour of such a person being an unregistered document, though such an agreement to sell may be enforceable under law. (173) P.L.R.
  •         Agreement to Sell - Witness to the agreement to sell unequivocally answered to a question put, in cross-examination, that he did not sign the stamp paper - The Stamp vendor has not been examined - It is very convenient way of frustrating the registered sale deed by entering into agreement to sell amongst brothers a part of the land - Suit rightly decreed. (180) P.L.R.
  • Agreement to Sell – In the light of amended provisions of Registration Act, it is crystal clear that the agreement to sell arrived at between the parties for sale and purchase of any land does not require registration - There is no requirement that the Scribe has to have a valid licence for the purpose - Even the parties on their own can put terms and conditions with regard to sale and purchase of the land - It has come on record that the plaintiffs marked their presence on the target date but the appellant did not come forward – Defendant could not take plea qua readiness and willingness since such plea was available to the defendant only in case where the agreement to sell was admitted – Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908).    (2018-3) Punjab Law Reporter 
  • Agreement to Sell – Any transaction carried out by the prospective vendor after execution of the agreement to sell would not defeat the rights of the prior agreement holder - In such circumstances, since the plaintiff is not a party to the aforesaid transaction, the plaintiff is not required to challenge the aforesaid sale deeds separately – Sale deeds executed in favour of subsequent purchasers are found to be collusive - Hence, liable to be ignored - Sale deeds executed by the owner after entering into the agreement to sell are not required to be challenged while filing a suit for specific performance of the agreement - The plaintiff entitled to ignore the same and it is sufficient to plead and prove that such sale deeds do not affect his rights. (2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to Sell - Argument that attesting witnesses/marginal witnesses were belonging to different places and they were not known to the parties to the suit - The marginal witnesses are not required to be known to the parties to the agreements to sell and they may be belonging to different places - The marginal witnesses are to sign the agreement to prove its genuineness - Agreement to sell is not required to be signed by the attesting witnesses - Once the execution of an agreement to sell between the parties is established, the parties are bound by the written agreement.. (2018-1 ) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to Sell - Both the agreements to sell are of same date are between the same parties - Plaintiff while filing the suit made a proper description of the properties involved in both the agreements - There is no requirement that separate suit could be required to be filed for each agreement to sell. (2018-1 ) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to Sell – Delay in filing suit – Suit was filed after almost 35 months -  However, as per the Limitation Act, 1963, the suit for specific performance of the agreement to sell can be filed within three years from the date fixed for execution and registration of the sale deed – Plaintiff before filing a suit served a notice on the defendants calling upon them to come and execute the sale deed - The aforesaid notice was not responded - Plaintiff has pleaded in her plaint that she was always ready and willing to perform her part of the contract - The third party rights have not intervened - In such circumstances, the specific performance of the agreement to sell cannot be denied to the plaintiff merely on account of delay in filing the suit. (2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to sell – Hindu family co-parcenary property - Agreement to sell executed by a Karta of the joint Hindu family cannot be refused once the agreement to sell is proved and the payment of earnest money and the plaintiff is able to prove that he is ready and willing to prove his part of the contract - A Karta of the joint Hindu family has a right to sell the property for legal necessity - Once a Karta enters into an agreement to sell, he cannot be allowed to avoid specific performance thereof on the ground that the property is a joint Hindu family property.   (2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to Sell – In the light of amended provisions of Registration Act, it is crystal clear that the agreement to sell arrived at between the parties for sale and purchase of any land does not require registration - There is no requirement that the Scribe has to have a valid licence for the purpose - Even the parties on their own can put terms and conditions with regard to sale and purchase of the land - It has come on record that the plaintiffs marked their presence on the target date but the appellant did not come forward – Defendant could not take plea qua readiness and willingness since such plea was available to the defendant only in case where the agreement to sell was admitted – Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908).     (2018-3) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to Sell – It is not the requirement of law that an agreement to sell has to be proved by examining deed writer - By examining the attesting witness of the agreement to sell onus has been discharged. (2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to Sell – Limitation to file suit – Since there was a date and a legal event specified for performance of the agreement, therefore, a refusal, if any, on the part of the defendant, even before that, is irrelevant – The plaintiff is entitled to file a suit within three years from the date agreed for performance, as specified in the terms of the agreement – Title of the defendant has been determined only qua 600 sq. Yards and not qua 1200 sq. Yds., as agreed by the defendant to sell to the plaintiff - This title was determined only on 15.09.2003 - Therefore, by any means, the suit for specific performance could not have been filed by the plaintiff for 600 sq. yards only, before the determination of the title of the defendant; because then his suit would have been dismissed even on that ground that there is no title of the defendant qua the suit properly.     (2018-3) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to sell – Merely because two different pens were used for signing on two different pages would not make the agreement to sell doubtful. (2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to Sell – No examination of stamp vendor – Will not cause any kind of doubt regarding the due and valid execution of the agreement to sell. (2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to Sell - Part payment made through post dated cheque - Here is a case where plaintiffs and defendant are known to each other - They belong to the same village - The family of the defendant is still living in the same village - In these circumstances, if some part of the payment is paid through Post Dated Cheque which is a small fraction, there is nothing unnatural about it.. (2018-1 ) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to Sell – Person who alleges fraud, forgery or fabrication has to prove fraud or forgery – Plaintiff had proved that the agreement to sell was duly executed by the defendant - The attesting witnesses to the agreement deposed before the court supporting the claim of the plaintiff - The Typist, who had typed the agreement to sell, also appeared before the court - The Notary Public, who had attested the agreement to sell, deposed in the court and supported the claim of the plaintiff - The said witnesses were duly cross-examined - Their deposition was not doubted - No adverse material had come during their cross-examination.  (2018-1) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to Sell – Plaintiff has not stepped into the witness box - Plaintiff has appeared through attorney who is not signatory to the agreement to sell - He does not know the circumstances in which the agreement was entered into - Therefore, his evidence cannot be treated as a substitute to the evidence of a plaintiff - Here is the case where the agreement is alleged to be interpolated - In such circumstances, it was necessary for the plaintiff to step into the witness box.  (2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to Sell - Plaintiff was given sufficient opportunity to get the sale deed executed - Defendant/appellant filed a fresh application before the Court calling upon the plaintiff to get the sale deed executed - The plaintiff did not still come forward to get the sale deed executed - If the plaintiff was really ready and willing to perform his part of the contract, he should have offered to deposit the amount straight-away in the bank either on the date of registration of the sale deed or thereafter, but he did not take such step - It was totally wrong on the part of the Court to record a finding that the plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. (2018-1 ) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to Sell – Specific Performance – Plea regarding willing to perform the agreement – Not specifically denied – The onus of proving the readiness and willingness was on the respondent-plaintiff - In my view, the plaintiff has miserably failed to prove the same - The readiness has to be from the date of the execution of the agreement to sell, till the filing of the suit and during the pendency of the suit - No doubt, the plaintiff has not taken specific plea, but since the onus was on the plaintiff - There is a reference of readiness and willingness, but no explanation has come forth as to what effective steps the plaintiff had taken after the expiry of extended stipulated date – Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963) Section 16(c).   (2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to Sell – That power of attorney and the agreement to sell were executed by different scribes, although on the same day does not in any way effect the validity of the agreement to sell - Rather on the other hand, it proves and contradicts the stand put forth by the defendants - Defendants have pleaded that at the time of execution of the general power of attorney signatures/thumb impressions of the defendants might have been obtained - Once both the documents were scribed by different document writers/scribes, the possibility of defendants having signed under wrong impression does not appear to be plausible.      (2018-3) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to Sell - There is no is requirement that payment should be paid in the presence of an attesting witness or a marginal witness - The agreement to sell is not a testamentary document that the attesting witness must know everything - He is only required to attest the document - Merely because the payment was not made before him would not create a dent in the case of the plaintiff. (2018-1 ) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to Sell – Three agreements – But the suit filed by the petitioner was only one - More than one agreements to sell has been executed between the same parties and cause of action to file the suit for specific performance is same, then the plaintiff would be entitled to file a single suit for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell. (2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER
  • Agreement to Sell or Loan Transaction – Plaintiff did not file the suit with promptitudeness and kept waiting for almost three years, though filing the same within limitation, but his stand of getting so many extensions of period of executing sale deed is rather suggestive of his lack of readiness and willingness – Suit of the plaintiff decreed for the amount paid along with 6% interest – Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963) Section 22(1)(a)(1). (2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER