SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Mad) 5108

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B. BALAJI, J.
Jayanthi - Petitioner
Vs.
Pichapillai - Respondent
C.R.P. (PD) No.2600 of 2025 and C.M.P. No.14739 of 2025
Decided On : 28-08-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.T. Deeraj

Unregistered Sale Deeds can be admitted for collateral purposes, such as establishing possession, provided stamp duties are paid, aligning with Sections 17 of Registration Act and 54 of Transfer of Property Act.

Headnote:(A) Registration Act, 1908 - Section 17 - Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Section 54 - Unregistered Sale Deed - Revision against dismissal of application to mark unregistered Sale Deed to establish possession - Unregistered documents can be utilized for collateral purposes, not establishing rights. Citing Bondar Singh and others vs. Nihal Singh and others: Unregistered deeds may indicate nature of possession; however, necessary stamp duty must be addressed for enforcement. (Paras 5, 6, 7, 10)

(B) Collateral Purpose - Possession and title in dispute - Collateral use of an unregistered sale deed is permissible to ascertain commencement of possession, subject to compliance with relevant stamp duties. (Paras 9, 10)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought to mark an unregistered Sale Deed dated 31.10.1988 to show commencement of possession. The trial Court dismissed the application, claiming the document's lack of registration, in accordance with Section 17 of the Registration Act, precluded its admissibility.

Findings of Court:
The Court held that while the unregistered Sale Deed could be marked for determining the commencement of possession, pending payment of required stamp duties.

Issues: The primary issue was whether an unregistered Sale Deed can be admitted to establish possession without seeking to establish rights based on it.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that under Section 49 of the Registration Act, unregistered documents may be relied upon for purposes other than establishing rights, such as ascertaining possession’s commencement, conditioned upon compliance with stamp duty requirements.

Result: C.R.P. allowed; previous dismissal set aside with no costs.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's status and application details. (Para 1 , 2)
2. contention regarding unregistered sale deed. (Para 3)
3. precedents on unregistered documents for possession. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. trial court's dismissal and grounds. (Para 8 , 9)
5. conditions for using unstamped document. (Para 10)
6. final decision and order. (Para 11)

ORDER :

P.B. BALAJI, J.

Heard Mr.T. Deeraj, learned counsel for the petitioner. Despite service of notice on the respondent, the respondent has neither appeared in person, nor through a counsel.

2. The petitioner is the 5th defendant in O.S. No.83 of 2014. An application in I.A. No.2 of 2020 was taken out to mark an unregistered Sale Deed, dated 31.10.1988. The trial Court finding that the petitioner is attempting to establish title through the said document, proceeded to dismiss the application. Aggrieved by the said order, the present revision has been filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the said unregistered Sale Deed is sought to be marked as a document only in order to establish the factum of possession, more specifically the commencement of possession being with the 1st defendant and subsequently with the 5th defendant. It is therefore the contention of Mr.T. Deeraj, learned counsel for the petitioner that the purpose for which the unregistered document is sought to be marked is only for collateral purpose. However, the trial Court has dismissed the application finding that admittedly the document is not a registered one as required under Section 17 of the REGISTRATION ACT , and therefore, the petitioner cannot be permitted to mark the said unregistered Sale Deed. 4. The learned counsel also relies on the following decisions :

i) Bondar Singh and others vs. Nihal Singh and others reported in (2003) 4 SCC 161.

ii) Ramamoorthy vs. M.Shanmugam and 2 others reported in (2009) 6 CTC 609

iii) Mayilu Ammal and another vs. Renganathan reported in (2005) 5 CTC 424

5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bondar Singh's case has categorically held that an unregistered Sale Deed can be looked into for ascertaining the nature of possession.

6. In Ramamoorthy's case also, this Court held that an unregistered conveyance deed can be looked into for ascertaining the nature of possession and also boundaries of property.

7. In Mayilu Ammal's case, as well, this Court relying on ratio laid down in Bondar Singh's case held that an unregistered and unstamped document can be looked into for collateral purpose viz., for finding out nature of possession of the suit property.

8. I have carefully considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and I have also gone through the decisions on which reliance is placed on by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

9. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also taken me through the written statement filed in the said suit as well the application filed in I.A. No.2 of 2020, wherein, it is specifically contended that the purpose of marking the said unregistered document is only to establish the date of commencement of possession with the defendants viz., the 1st defendant, father and subsequently with the 5th defendant. The trial Court without adverting its attention to the request made by the petitioner has merely proceeded to hold that Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 read with Section 17 of the REGISTRATION ACT , 1908 requires the Sale Deed to be registered and duly stamped and in the instant case, the Sale Deed being unregistered as well as unstamped, cannot be permitted to be received as document.

10. The trial Court has lost sight of the fact that Section 49 permits a party to rely on even an unregistered document, as long as no right is sought to be established under the said document. Here, the specific case on which the application came to be filed was that the petitioner wanted to establish the commencement of possession being with the revision petitioner and incidentally the factum of possession be

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top