In Brief
In this appeal concerning immovable property, the Supreme Court clarified when a compromise decree requires registration under the Registration Act, 1908. The original suit (1984) was based on adverse possession, with a compromise decree granted in 1985. The respondents later challenged admission of this decree as evidence, arguing it lacked mandatory registration. The High Court agreed, holding that since the suit was based on adverse possession, the plaintiff had no pre-existing title. The Supreme Court reversed this, holding that compromise decrees relating to property that is the subject-matter of the suit are exempted from registration under Section 17(2)(vi). The Court allowed the appeal, directing the decree be admitted as evidence.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.