MARKANDEY KATJU, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal by special leave has been filed against the impugned judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dated 22. 10. 2003 in regular Second Appeal No. 2176 of 1985.

"any decree or order of a Court except a decree or order expressed to be made on a compromise and comprising immovable property other than that which is the subject-matter of the suit or proceeding. "

(emphasis supplied)

( 11 ) IN our opinion the exception mentioned in Section 17 (2) (vi) means that if a suit is filed by the plaintiff in respect of property A, then a decree in that suit in respect of immovable property B (which was not the subject-matter of the suit at all) will require registration. This is the view taken by this Court in K. Raghunandan and Ors. vs. Ali Hussain Sabir and Ors. 2008 (9) Scale 215.

( 12 ) HOWEVER, a different view was taken by this Court in Bhoop Singh vs. Ram Singh Major 1995 (5) SCC 709 in which it is stated that :

". . . . . . We would think that the exception engrafted is meant to cover that decree or order of a court, including a decree or order expressed to be made on a compromise, which declares the pre-existing right and does not by itself create new