Case Note & Summary
The present appeal was filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 challenging the judgment and decree dated 08.05.2024 passed by the learned 5th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bharuch in Special Civil Suit No.124 of 2014. The trial court had decreed the suit filed by the original plaintiffs (respondent Nos.1 and 2) and cancelled the notarized Agreement to Sell dated 10.08.2011. The court further directed the appellant-defendant to handover possession of the suit property within two months and to pay mesne profits from 11.08.2014 at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per month till handing over possession. The suit property comprised industrial sheds and machinery at Bholav GIDC Estate, Bharuch. The original plaintiffs were partners of Shraddha Heat Treatment along with defendant No.3. The appellant-defendant claimed rights under the notarized Agreement to Sell. The High Court, after hearing the parties, held that the notarized but unregistered Agreement to Sell was void and could not be enforced for specific performance. The court also upheld the award of mesne profits from the date of suit. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Registration Act, 1908 - Sections 17 and 49 - Agreement to Sell - Notarization vs Registration - An agreement to sell immovable property valued over Rs.100/- must be registered under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908. Notarization does not cure the defect of non-registration. Such an unregistered document is inadmissible in evidence for the purpose of specific performance under Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908. The court held that the notarized Agreement to Sell dated 10.08.2011 was void and could not be enforced. (Paras 1, 2.1, 3, 4) B) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order 20 Rule 12 - Mesne Profits - Mesne profits can be awarded from the date of filing of the suit if the defendant is in wrongful possession. The court held that the appellant-defendant was liable to pay mesne profits at Rs.10,000/- per month from 11.08.2014 (date of suit) till handing over possession. (Paras 1, 2.1, 3, 4) C) Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Section 10 - Specific Performance - For a contract of sale of immovable property to be specifically enforced, it must be valid and registered if required by law. An unregistered agreement to sell, even if notarized, cannot be the basis for a decree of specific performance. The court upheld the trial court's decree cancelling the agreement and directing possession. (Paras 1, 2.1, 3, 4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a notarized but unregistered Agreement to Sell can be enforced for specific performance of immovable property, and whether mesne profits can be awarded from the date of filing of the suit.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial court's decree cancelling the Agreement to Sell, directing possession, and awarding mesne profits.
Law Points
- Agreement to Sell not registered despite being notarized is void for specific performance
- Mesne profits can be awarded from date of suit
- Notarization does not substitute registration
