Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Registration Act

17 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

RAJENDRA PRATAP SINGHversusRAMESHWAR PRASAD

1998 INSC 40428 October 1998Dismissed

The petitioner, a tenant, was evicted by the respondent, the landlord, under Section 11(1)(e) of the Bihar Building (Lease Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 on the ground that the fixed‑term lease had expired. The tenant contended that the lease was invalid because the registered deed of Kabuliyat was signed only by

SHRL SUNIL SLDDHARTHBHAL ETCversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AHMEDABAD ETC.

1985 INSC 20727 September 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a partner in two different partnership firms, contributed shares of limited companies to the firms as capital. The Revenue argued that the contribution constituted a transfer of a capital asset under section 45 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and that a capital gain arose because the market value of the shar

BHAIYA RAMANUJ PRATAP DEOversusLALU MAHESHANUJ PRATAP DEO & ORS. AND VICE-VERSA

1981 INSC 15126 August 1981Disposed off

Bhaiya Rudra Pratap Deo, holder of the impartible Nagaruntari estate, executed an unregistered maintenance (khorposh) deed in 1952 granting eight villages to his brother’s son, Lalu Maheshanuj. The plaintiff alleged fraud and that the deed was void under Section 12A of the Chota Nagpur Encumbered Estates Act and the Bi

NAWAL KISHORE TULARAversusDINESH CHAND GUPTA AND ORS.

2001 INSC 31025 July 2001Disposed off

Ram Sahay filed a suit for declaration of ownership and possession of a shop. The defendant, Nawal Kishore, claimed an agreement to sell the shop existed, but the plaintiff objected to its exhibition on the grounds that it was unregistered and insufficiently stamped. The trial court upheld the objection, holding the do

STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.versusHARAPRIYA BISOI

2009 INSC 56020 April 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned 53.95 acres of land in Bhubaneswar that vested in the State of Orissa under a 1954 notification of the Orissa Estate Abolition Act, 1951. The respondent, Harapriya Bisoi, claimed she was a "deemed tenant" because her predecessor had obtained a lease from the erstwhile intermediaries before vesting

SNEH GUPTAversusDEVI SARUP & ORS.

2009 INSC 20117 February 2009Dismissed

The appellant, Sneh Gupta, an heir of Munni Devi, challenged a compromise decree that had been entered into by the original plaintiff Veena Nirwani and certain defendants during the pendency of two suits concerning land mutation and alleged fraud. The compromise resulted in the withdrawal of both suits, but Gupta and o

MST. PARAM PAL SINGH THROUGH FATHERversusM/S NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. & ANR.

2012 INSC 62114 December 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an adopted son of a truck driver who died while driving a long‑distance haul, claimed compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. The Supreme Court examined whether the adoption was valid under Hindu law and whether the driver’s death constituted an "accident" arising out of and in the cours

CUDDALORE POWERGEN CORPORATION LTDversusM/S CHEMPLAST CUDDALORE VINYLS LIMITED AND ANR.

2025 INSC 7314 January 2025Dismissed

The plaintiff, Chemplast, entered into an agreement to sell a parcel of land to the appellant, Cuddalore Powergen, but registration of the sale deed was blocked by a Government Order (GO) that reserved the land for a power project. The plaintiff filed a first suit seeking a permanent injunction against the appellant an

EVEREST CO-OWNERS, A.B.C.versusM.P. STATE WARE HOUSING CORPORATION AND ANOTHER

1992 INSC 27513 October 1992Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Everest Co‑owners, owned three godowns that were leased to the Food Corporation of India and later occupied by the respondent, M.P. State Ware Housing Corporation, without the appellant’s consent. After the lease expired, the appellant claimed damages of Rs 4,76,984 and invoked the arbitration clause in

RAM JANKIJEE DEITIES AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1999 INSC 23711 May 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned two Hindu deities, Ram Jankijee and Thakur Raja (also called Raja Rani), each of which had been the beneficiary of a separate deed of dedication of 81.14 acres of land, registered and placed in possession through shebaits. Under the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surp

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.versusATUR INDIA PVT. LTD.

1994 INSC 6511 February 1994

The State of Maharashtra invited tenders for a 99‑year lease of a plot in the Backbay Reclamation area. Atur India Pvt. Ltd. responded as a promoter, seeking to transfer the lease benefit to a cooperative housing society. The Collector accepted the tender but did not effect an actual demise, and later demanded stamp du

SHRI DWARKA PRASAD AGARWAL (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ANR.versusB.D. AGARWAL AND ORS.

2003 INSC 3007 July 2003Disposed off

The case involved a partnership firm that owned a newspaper, which was allegedly transferred to a newly incorporated company. A settlement deed purporting to resolve private disputes among the partners was recorded by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in a writ petition, even though the deceased appellant, Dwarka Prasad Ag

KHUSHAL CHAND SWARUP CHAND ZABAK JAINversusSURESH CHANDRA KANHIYALAL KOCHAR AND ANR.

1994 INSC 4334 October 1994Dismissed

Raja Bai executed a registered gift deed on 20 June 1957 in favour of Suresh Chandra, retaining possession and enjoyment of the property for her lifetime. She later executed a registered will on 27 December 1965 bequeathing the same property to the appellant. After her death in May 1966, the appellant sued for declarat

LAKSHMI NARAYANANversusS.S. PANDIAN

2000 INSC 4304 September 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Lakshmi Narayanan, obtained an ex parte eviction decree against tenant S.S. Pandian under the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act, 1960 and filed an execution petition. During execution proceedings the parties compromised: the tenant surrendered part of the premises and entered into a three‑y

STATE OF GUJARATversusNARGES K. PANTHAKY

1995 INSC 6782 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Gujarat initiated proceedings under the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, 1960 to determine the ceiling and surplus area of a parcel of land. The respondent claimed that an agreement dated 14 October 1969 had transferred 30 acres to his mother, a transfer that had been recorded through mutation on 15

SMT. GOMTIBAI (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND ORS.versusMATTULAL (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.

1996 INSC 11361 October 1996Dismissed

The dispute concerned a partition suit filed by Mattulal against his brother Govinddas, wherein Govinddas claimed that the land had been gifted to their cousin sister Kasturibai. The lower courts held that the alleged gift was not valid because no registered deed, signed by the donor and attested by two witnesses, exis

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search