HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL FIRST APPEAL NO. 133 OF 2005 Ratan Prakash ……Appellant/Plaintiff. Versus Sri Faggu and others. …Respondents/Defendants. 9.4.2008 Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. Heard Sri Alok Singh, Sr. Advocate, assisted by Sri D. Barthwal, counsel for the appellant and Sri Manav Sharma & Vinod Tiwari, counsel for the respondents. 2. By the present First Appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, appellant has prayed for setting aside 17.9.2005 passed by Additional District Judge VIIth F.T.C. Dehradun in Original Suit No. 523/2002 Ratan Prakash Vs. Faggu and others. 3. Briefly stated, a suit was filed by the plaintiff / appellant being Original Suit No. 523 of 2002 Ratan Prakash Vs. Faggu and others praying to the following effect: “vr% ekuuh; egksn; ls uez izkFkZuk gS fd oknh ds i{k esa rFkk izfroknhx.k ds fo:) fuEu izfrdkjksa dh vkKfIr ikfjr dh tkosA ¼d½ ;g fd izfroknh la[;k ƒ ls … dks vknsf’kr fd;k tkos fd og oknh rFkk izfroknh la[;k ƒ ls … esa vafdr o fu"ikfnr vuqcU/k fnukad ƒ&ƒ„&2000 dk iathdj.k djsa] rFkk mDr lafons dk fof’k"V vuqikyu ?kksf"kr fd;k tkos rFkk izfroknh la[;k ƒ ls … dks vknsf’kr fd;k tkos fd og okn i= dh lwph esa of.kZr lEifrr dk fodz; foys[k oknh ds i{k esa] U;k;ky; }kjk fu/kkZfjr le;kof/k esa 2 vafdr o fu"ikfnr djs rFkk izfroknh la[;k † mDr fodz; foys[k esa lk{kh ds :i esa gLrk{kj djsA ¼[k½ ;g fd ;g ?kks"k.kk dh tkos fd oknxzLr lEifRr oknh ds v/;klu esa fnukad ƒ&ƒ„&„000 ls pyh vk jgh gSvkSj ekuuh; ijxukf/kdkjh fodkluxj }kjk ikfjr vkns’k ls nks ekg iwoZ] yxkrkj fcuk fdlh gLr{ksi ds Hkh dCts esa FkhA bl izdkj oknh izfroknh la[;k ‡ ls v/;klu ikus dk vf/kdkjh gS rnkuqlkj izfroknh la[;k ‡ dks funsZf’kr fd;k tkuk vko’;d gSA ¼x½ ;g fd izfroknh la[;k ƒ ls † dks LFkkbZ O;kns’k fuf"k) fd;k tkos fd og ijxukf/kdkjh fodkluxj ls okn i= dh lwph esa of.kZr lEifRr ds fdlh v/;klu dh ekax u djs vkSj u gh izfroknh la[;k ‡ okn i= dh lwph esa of.kZr lEifrr dk v/;klu izfroknh la[;k † dks ns rFkk mDr lEifRr dk v/;klu oknh dks vfoyEc lefiZr djsA rnkuqlkj oknh ds v/;klu esas gLr{ksi ls izfroknh&x.kksa dks fuf"k) j[kk tkosA ¼?k½ ;g fd vU; dksbZ izfrdkj fd tks oknh dks feyuk lEHko gks vkSj izfroknhx.kksa ds fo:) gks] oknh dks fnyok;k tkosA ¼M-½ ;g fd leLr okn O;; oknh dks izfroknhx.kksa ls fnyok;k tkosA 4. As will appear from the aforesaid relief, plaintiff has sought a declaration for getting the agreement dated 1.12.2000 registered and thereafter for getting the sale deed registered in favour of the plaintiff. In the relief Kha further prayer has been made that the possession may be delivered from the custody of the defendant no. 5. In relief Ga further prayer has been made for permanent injunction restraining the defendants no. 1 to 4 not to take possession from the defendant no. 5 and thereafter, he has prayed for handing over the possession to the plaintiff. 3 5. According to the plaint averments, defendants no. 1 to 3 have executed an unregistered agreement to sell in favour of the plaintiff on a consideration of Rs. 27,000/- per bigha and at the time of agreement to sell, a sum of Rs. 5,000/- was given to the defendants no. 1 to 3 and the document was executed on stamp paper of Rs. 10/- only. According to the plaint version, on 19th April, 2001, notice was sent to the defendants, but of no avail. In paragraph no. 6 of the plaint, it has been stated that the sale deed has been executed in favour of the defendant no. 4 on 23rd April, 2001, which has been registered on the same day. 6. A written statement has been filed by the defendants stating therein that no such agreement was ever executed between the plaintiff and the defendants no. 1 to 3 and the defendant no. 4 after the sale deed in his favour is continuing in possession. The defendants have stated that before execution of the sale deed on 23.4.2001 in favour of the defendant no. 4 the property was continuing in his possession under the mortgage deed executed by the plaintiff in his favour. Paragraphs no. 2 and 3 of the written statement are quoted below: “2- ;g fd okn i= dh pj.k la[;k 2 esa fd;k x;k dFku xyr ,oa vlR; gS vr% vLohdkj gS izfroknh la[;k ƒ ls … us oknh ds lkFk viuh okn i= esa dfFkr okn xzLr Hkwfe dks fodz; djus dh dksbZ dfFkr lafonk dHkh ugha dh vr% fnukad 1-12-2000 bZloh dks lafonk dh 'krksZa ij gLrk{kj djus rFkk 5000 :i;s dh dksbZ /kujkf’k vfxze /kujkf’k oknh ls izfroknh la[;k ƒ ls … ds }kjk izkIr djus dk dFku iw.kZr% vlR; gS rnkuqlkj viuh oknxzLr Hkwfe dk izfroknhx.k la[;k ƒ ls … ds }kjk oknh dks fnukad ƒ-ƒ„-„000 bZloha dks dCtk nsus dk oknh dk Dkfu Hkh vlR; gS vkSj ;g dFku Hkh >wBk gS ,oa xyr gS fd [kM+h Qly dk Hkqxrku oknh }kjk fd;k x;kA vr% 4 oknh dks okn i= dh pj.k la[;k 2 esa fd;k x;k leLr dFku vLohdkj gS okLrfodrk ;g gS fd izfroknh la[;k ƒ ls … ds lg[kkrsnkj jksrM+ iq= izrki us vius dCts dh okn xzLr Hkwfe dks jgu e; dCtk fyf[kr jgu ukek fnukad ˆ-†-„000 bZloh ds vuqlkj dh izfroknh la0 4 ds ;gka j[kh gqbZ Fkh vkSj fnukad ˆ-†-„000 bZloh ls yxkrkj izfroknh la[;jk † dk dCtk dk’rokn xzLr Hkwfe ij pyk vk jgk gS [kkrsnkj jgu j[kh xbZ Hkwfe dk eqDr djkus dh fLFkfr esa ugha Fks vr% izfroknh la[;k ƒ ls ,oa … ,oa muds lg[kkrsnkj jksrM+ iq= izrku us viuh oknxzLr Hkwfe dk LosPNk ls lksp le> dj fcuk fdlh /kks[ks o ncko ds okn xzLr dh xbZ Hkwfe dk fodz; ctfj;s fodz; i= „…-†- „00ƒ bZaloh dj fn;k Fkk] fnukafd „…-†-„00ƒ bZloh dks fodz; i= ds fu"iknu ls iwoZ gh fodzsrk x.kksa ,oa dszrkvksa us fodzhr Hkwfe dks jgu eqDr djk o dj fn;k vkilh LosPNk ls eku fy;k x;k Fkk rc Hkkj eqDr Hkwfe ds :i esa dCtk ifjorZu djus ds mYys[k ds lkFk fodz; i= fu"ikfnr djds jftLVjh djk;k x;k Fkk izfroknh la[;k † ekSds ij iwoZr% dkfct dk’r yxkrkj pyk vk jgk gS- 3- ;g fd okn i= dh pj.k la[;k 3 esa fd;k x;k dFku iw.kZr% xyr ,oa vlR; gS vr% vLohdkj gS oknh dk okn xzLr Hkwfe ij dHkh Hkh dksbZ dCtk dk’r ugha j[kk vksj u gh gS okLrfodrk Åij dh pj.k la[;k 2 esa n’kkZ;h tk pqdh gS- 7. As will appear from the aforesaid, the defendants have denied the averments contained in the plaint that plaintiff was in possession at any point of time in pursuance of the agreement in his favour. 8. The plaintiff has filed per list 54 copy of the agreement dated 1.12.2000, copy of the information letter dated 19.4.2001, copy of the receipt No. 0305 of the Post Office, copy of the receipt No. 0306 of the Post Office, copy of the receipt No. 0307 of the Post Office, certified copy of the sale deed dated 5 23.4.2001 and application dated 11.4.2002 moved before Up Ziladhikari, Dehradun. The plaintiff has filed an affidavit Paper No. 31C/1. 9. The defendants have filed a joint affidavit Paper No. 21 C/1. The defendants have further filed certified copy of the Khasra No. 1165/1 Fasli 1397 to 1399 Fasli and Khasra No. 628, 629 and 630 from 1405 to 1406 Fasli, certified copy of the Khasra No. 628, 629 and 630 for 1409 Fasli, original of the mortgage deed dated 6.4.2000 along with possession between Sri Rotar Singh S/o Pratap , R/o Devthalaa, District Dehradun Vs. Sri Dhyan Singh S/o Bhegu, R/o Vyas Bhoorkhat Haripur Vyas, Tehsil Chakrauta, District Dehradun. Certificate dated 14.3.2002 issued by the Gran Panchayat Rudrapur, Vikas Khand, Vikas Nagar whereby the Gram Pradhan has approved the caste of Mangal Singh R/o Devthala as Vanshfod, and copy of the letter 150/ST/02 dated 30.5.2002. 10. The trial Court on has dismissed the suit by recording a finding to the following effect: “oknh }kjk okn i= esa igyk vuqrks"k izfroknh la0 1 yxk;r 3 ds fo:) ;g ekaxk gS fd izfroknh la0 1 yxk;r 3 vuqcU/k fnukafdr 1@12@2000 dk iathdj.k djsa rFkk fodz; foys[k esa lk{kh ds :I esa gLrk{kj djsA esjh jk; esaoknh }kjk izfroknh la0 1 yxk;r 3 ,oa 4 ds fo:) ftl izdkj ds mi;qZDr vuqrks"k ekaxs x;s gSa mls oknh ds i{k esa Lohdkj ugha fd;k tk ldrk D;ksafd oknh o i=koyh ij ftl vuqcU/k fnukafdr 1@12@2000 dh ckr dg dj vk;k gS rFkk tks mlds }kjk i=koyh esa dkxt la0 6, ds :i esas nkf[ky fd;k gS og vujftLVMZ bdjkjukek gS tks egt 10 :i;s ds LVkEi ij oknh rFkk izfroknhx.k1 yxk;r 3 ds chp] oknh ds dFku ds vuqlkj fy[kk tkuk crk;k x;k gSA dkxt la0 6 , dfFkr 6 bdjkjukek dks voyksfdr djus ds mijkUr ;g ik;k fd ;g vpy lEifRr vFkkZr oknh dh Hkwfe [kljk la0 628] 629] 630 dqy jdck 0-1900 gsDVs- fodz; fd;s tkus ds lUnHkZ esa gSA pwafd ;g dfFkr bdjkjukek vpy lEifRr ds fodz; fd;s tkus gsrq oknh rFkk izfroknhx.k ds chp fnukad 1@12@2000 dks 10 :i;s ds LVkEi ij fy[kk tkuk crk;k x;k gS ftldh dkuwu esa dksbZ Hkh xzkg~;rk ugha gS D;ksafd vpy lEifRr ds fodz; gsrq fy[kk tkus okyk vuqcU/k vFkkZr bdjkjukek dk iathd`r gksuk dkuwuu vfuok;Z gS ijUrq ,slk bl dsl esa ugha gSA oknh rFkk izfroknhx.k ds chp bl dfFkr vujkftLVMZ bdjkjukek fnukafdr 1@12@2000 dks fy[kk tkuk crk;k x;k gS tc fd oknh dh rjQ ls blds fu"iknu gsrq okn dh rjQ ls Lo;a gh dkxt la0 11 lh fodz; i= dh izekf.kr izfrfyfi nkf[ky dh x;h gS ftlds voyksdu ls ;gh fu"d"kZ fudyrk gS fd bl dsl ds izfroknhx.k 1 yxk;r 3 ,oa jksrM+ }kjk izfroknh la0 4 ds gd esa fnukad 23&4&01 dks fodz; dj fn;k gS rc fQj oknh dks pkfg, Fkk fd og fnukad 23&4&01 dks fu"ikfnr fodz; i= dks [kf.Mr djkus ds fy, l{ke U;k;ky; esa okn nk;j djrk ijUrq ,slk oknh }kjk tkucw> dj ugha fd;k x;k rc fQj oknh }kjk dfFkr vujftLVMZ bdjkjukek fnukafdr 1@12@2000 ds vk/kkj ij mls iathdj.k djus rFkk dfFkr lafonk dk fof’k"V vuqikyu iksf"kr fd;s tkus vFkok fookfnr lEifRr dk fodz; foys[k oknh ds i{k esa fu"ikfnr djus rFkk izfroknh la0 4 dks bl izdkj fodz; foys[k esa lk{kh ds :i esa gLrk{kj djus ds fy;s ck/; ugha fd;k tk ldrk vkSj u gh bl izdkj dk vuqrks"k oknh dks Lohd`r fd;k tk ldrk gSA tgkWa rd oknh }kjk ekaxs x;s rhljs ;g vuqrks"k fd okn xzLr lEifRr oknh ds v/;klu esa fnukad 1@12@2000 Hkwfe dk v/;klu oknh] izfroknh la0 5 ls ikus dk vf/kdkjh gS bl izdkj vuqrks"k Hkh oknh dks bl dkj.k Lohd`r ugha fd;k tk ldrk fd i=koyh ij oknh dh rjQ ls ,slk dksbZ Hkh larks"ktud izek.k nkf[ky ugha 7 fd;k gS ftlls ;g fu"d"kZ fudkyk tk lds fd dfFjr bdjkjukek fnukafdr 1@12@2000 ls v/;klu esa gSA oknh }kjk vius okni= esa fd;k x;k ;g dFkfu fd ijxukf/kdkjh] fodkluxj }kjk /kkjk 145 tkIrk QkStnkjh ds rgr Hkwe dks dqdZ djds izfroknh la0 5 ds v/;klu esa ns fn;k x;k gS ,slk Hkh dksbz lk{; i=koyh ij ugha gS u gh ijxukf/kdkjh] fodkluxj }kjk /kkjk 145 tkIrk QkStnkjh ds rgr pyh dk;Zokgh dk dksbZ izek.k gS vkSj u gh bl ckr dk dksbZ izek.k gS fd ijxukf/kdkjh] fodkluxj }kjk oknh ds dCts esa Hkwfe dks ysdj izfroknh la0 5 ds dCts esa dqdZ djus ds ckn nh x;h gksA oknh dh rjQ ls tks Nk;k izfr mi ftykf/kdkjh] fodkluxj dks fy[ks x;s i= fnukafdr 11&4&2002 dh nkf[ky dh gS mls Hkh oknh dks dksbZ enn ugha feyrh fQj fnukad 11&4&2002 dks mi ftykf/kdkjh fodkluxj dks fy[ks x;s i= esa Hkh oknh }kjk fookfnr tehu ij dCtk fnyk;s tkus rFkk xsgWaw dh Qlj fnyk;s tkus dk vkxzg fd;k gS pwafd fookfnr lEifRr ij fnukad 1@12@2000 ls oknh dk dkfct gksuk vFkkZr fookfnr Hkwfe oknh ds v/;klu esa gksus dk dksbZ izek.k ugha gS vkSj u gh ijxukf/kdkjh] fodkluxj ds U;k;ky; eas /kkjk 145 tkIrk QkStnkjh ds rgr pyh dk;Zokgh dk dksbZ izek.k gS rc fQj okn i= esa vuqrks"k ds :i esa oknh }kjk tks ekax dh x;h gS mls Hkh Lohdkj ugha fd;k tk ldkA tgkWa rd okn i= esa ekaxs x;s vuqrks"k x dk iz’u gS bl izdkj dk vuqrks"k Hkh oknh dks Lohd`r ugha fd;k tk ldrk pwafd Lohd`r :i ls izfroknh la0 4 ds gd esa fookfnr Hkwfe dk fnukad 23&4&2001 dks fodz; foys[k fd;k tk pqdk gS rFkk fodz; i= fnukafdr 23&4&2001 jftLVMZ fodz; i= gS tSlk fd i=koyh ij 11 lh &1 yxk;r 11 lh &14 nkf[ky gS mlds vuqlkj izfroknh la0 4 fookfnr Hkwfe dk ekfyd gS rFkk fodz; i= dh fnukad ls izfroknh la0 4 dk dCtk gS vkSj pwafd ;g ,d jftLVMZ fodz; i= gS bl dkj.k izfroknh la0 1 yxk;k 4 ds fo:) LFkkbZ O;kns’k bl vk’k; dh tkjh uga dh tk ldrh fd og 8 ijxukf/kdkjh] fodkluxj ls okni= dh lwph esa of.kZr lEifRr ds fdlh v/;klu dh ekax u djsA bl vk’k; dh Hkh LFkkbZ O;kns’k tkjh ugha fd;k ldrk fd izfroknh la0 5 okni= dh lwph esa of.kZr lEifRr dk v/;klu izfroknh la0 4 dks ns ns lkFk gh bl vk’k; dk O;kns’k tkjh ugha fd;k tk ldrk fd izfroknh la0 4 dfFkr lEifRr dk v/;klu oknh dks vfoyEc lefiZr dj nsA bl vk’k; dk Hkh O;kns’k tkjh ugha fd;k tk ldrk fd izfroknhx.k oknh ds v/;klu esa gLr{ksi u djsA esjh jk; esa oknh }kjk ftu vfHkopuksa dks ysdj izfroknhx.k ds fo:) okn izLrqr fd;k x;k gS rFkk mlds rgl ftl izdkj ds vuqrks"k ekaxs x;s gSa mUgsa oknh izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh ugha ik;k tkrkA oknh ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dh rjQ ls tks ,d rjQk rdZ izLrqr fd;s gS lkFk gh Vh-ih- ,DV 1882 dh /kkjk &53 , vius rdksZa ds leFkZu esa izLrqr dh gS mlls oknh dks dksbZ Hkh ykHk ugha feyrk vkSj u gh oknh dh rjQ ls vius rdksZ ds leFkZu esas is’k dh x;h mi;qZDr ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; dh fof/k O;oLFkk ls gh oknh dks dksbZ ykHk ugha feyrkA pwafd oknh }kjk izfroknhx.k ds fo:) ekaxs x;s vuqrks"k bl izdkj ds gSa ftUgsa dnkfi Hkh Lohdkj ugha fd;k tk ldrkA oknh dk dksBZ Hkh izFke n`"V;k dsl ugha gS rc fQj mlds gd esa lqfo/kk dk lUrqyu gksus dk Hkh dksbZ iz’u ugha mBrk pwafd oknh dk iz’uxr fookfnr Hkwfe ij 'kq: ls gh dksbZ Hkh dCtk ugha gS rc fQj mls fdlh Hkh viw.khZ; {kfr gksus dk Hkh iz’u ugha mBrkA oknh }kjk izLrqr okn dks] oknh fl) djus esa iwjh rjQ ls vlQy jgk gS rc fQj oknh dk nkok fo:) izfroknhx.k [kf.Mr gksus ;ksX; gSAÞ 11. Counsel for the appellant has submitted that registration is wholly material. 12. On the other hand counsel for the respondent has referred the finding recorded by the courts below that the document dated 1.12.2000 Paper No. 6-A is an unregistered 9 document and this relates to Khasra No. 628, 629 and 630 total area 0.1900 hectares, therefore, no indulgence can be placed on such a document in view of Section 17 of the Registration Act. 13. Section 17 of the Registration Act reads as under:- “17. Documents of which registration is compulsory. (1) The following documents shall be regisrterd, if the property to which they relate is situate in a district in which, and if they have been executed on or after the date on which, Act No. XVI of 1864, or the Indian Registration Act, or the Indian Registration Act, 1871, or the Indian Registration Act, 1877, or this Act came or comes into force, namely:-- (b) other non-testamentary instruments which purport or operate to create declare, assign, limit or extinguish, whether is present or in future, any right, title or interest, whether vested or contingent, of the value of one hundred rupees and upwards, to or in immovable property; (c) non-testamentary instruments which acknowledge the receipt or payment of any consideration on account of the creation, declaration, assignment, limitation or extinction of any such right, title or interest; and 14. Counsel for the respondent has also referred the definition of sale as contained under Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act. It reads as under: 54. “Sale” defined.—“Sale” is a transfer of ownership in exchange for a price paid or promised or part-paid and part- promised. Sale how made.—Such transfer, in the case of tangible immoveable property of the value of one hundred rupees and upwards,or in the case of a reversion or other intangible thing, can be made only by a registered instrument. 10 In the case of tangible immoveable property of a value less than one hundred rupees, such transfer may be made either by a registered instrument or by delivery of the property. Delivery of tangible immoveable property takes place when the seller places the buyer, or such person as he directs, in possession of the property. Contract for sale.—A contract for the sale of immoveable property is a contract that a sale of such property shall take place on terms settled between the parties. It does not, of itself, create any interest in or charge on such property.” 15. In view of the aforesaid, the finding has been recorded by the court below that the agreement to sell dated 1.12.2000 cannot be taken into consideration. 16. Another ground which has been referred by the trial Court is that the suit has been filed on 29.7.2002 and no prayer has been made for cancellation of the sale deed 23.4.2001, which has been executed in favour of the defendant no. 4. 17. So far as the second relief which has been sought by the plaintiff is concerned, the property was continuing in possession of the defendant no. 4 in pursuance of the mortgage deed dated 6.4.2000. 18. Sale deed dated 23.4.2001 in favour of the defendant shows that the possession was handed over to the defendant no. 4 in pursuance of the mortgage deed dated 6.4.2000 and transferee is continuing in possession since then. 11 19. Sri Alok Singh, Sr. Advocate has submitted that in view of Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act, the plaintiff is entitled for his possession as well as for registration of the agreement in his favour. 20. Counsel for the appellant has referred un-amended Section 53 – A of the Transfer of Property Act. The same reads as under: “53A. Part Performance.—Where any person contracts to transfer for consideration any immovable property by writing signed by him or on his behalf from which the terms necessary to constitute the transfer can be ascertained with reasonable certainty, and the transferee has, in part performance of the contract, taken possession of the property or any part thereof, or the transferee, being already in possession, continues in possession in part performance of the contract and has done some act in furtherance of the contract, and the transferee has performed or is willing to perform his part of the contract, then, notwithstanding that the contract though required to be registered, has not been registered, or, where there is an instrument of transfer, that the transfer has not been completed in the manner prescribed therefor by the law for the time being in force, the transferor or any person claiming under him shall be debarred from enforcing against the transferee and persons claiming under him any right in respect of the property of which the transferee has taken or continued in possession, other than a right expressly provided by the terms of the contract: Provided that nothing in this section shall affect the rights of a transferee for consideration who has no notice of the contract or of the part performance thereof. 12 21. Counsel for the appellant has referred Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act, which has now been amended. It read as under “53A. Part Performance.—Where any person contracts to transfer for consideration any immovable property by writing signed by him or on his behalf from which the terms necessary to constitute the transfer can be ascertained with reasonable certainty, and the transferee has, in part performance of the contract, taken possession of the property or any part thereof, or the transferee, being already in possession, continues in possession in part performance of the contract and has done some act in furtherance of the contract, and the transferee has performed or is willing to perform his part of the contract, then, notwithstanding that [* * *], where there is an instrument of transfer, that the transfer has not been completed in the manner prescribed therefor by the law for the time being in force, the transferor or any person claiming under him shall be debarred from enforcing against the transferee and persons claiming under him any right in respect of the property of which the transferee has taken or continued in possession, other than a right expressly provided by the terms of the contract: Provided that nothing in this section shall affect the rights of a transferee for consideration who has no notice of the contract or of the part performance thereof.” 22. The aforesaid unamended Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act has no application in the present case. 23. In the present case, the provisions of Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act has not been complied with as the possession has not been handed over to the plaitniff and as 13 such there is no applicability of Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act. 24. In Nathulal v. Phoolchand AIR 1970 SC 546, some conditions have been given for making out the defence of part performance to the following effect: “9. The conditions necessary for making out the defence of part performance to an action in ejectment by the owner are: (1) that the transferor has contracted to transfer for consideration any immovabele property by writing signed by him or on his behalf from which the terms necessary to constitute the transfer can ascertained with reasonable certainty; (2) that the transferee has, in art performance of the contract, taken possession of the property or any part thereof, or the transferee, being already in possession continues in possession in part performance of the contract; (3) that the transferee has done some act in furtherance of the contract; and (4) that the transferee has performance or is willing to perform his part of the contract. If these conditions are fulfilled then notwithstanding that the contract, though required to be registered, has not been registered, or, where there is an instrument of transfer, that the transfer has not been completed in the manner prescribed therefor by the law for the time being in force, the transferor or any persons claiming under him is debarred from enforcing against the transferee any right in respect of the property of which the transferee has taken or continued in possession other than a right expressly provided by the terms of the contract.” 14 25. The aforesaid case law is fully applicable to the facts of the present case. 26. Counsel for the appellant has referred the judgment of Kalavakurti Venkata Subbaiah Vs. Bala Gurappagari Guruvi Reddy 1999(5) JT 389. Paragraph 8 of the judgment is quoted below: “Where the stage indicated in Section 77 of the Act has reached and no other relief except a direction for registration of the document is really asked for, Section 77 of the Act may be an exclusive remedy. However, in other cases it has no application, inasmuch as a suit for specific performance is of wider amplitude and is primarily one for enforcement of a contract and other consequential or further relief. If a party is seeking not merely the registration of a sale deed, but also recovery of possession and mesne profits or damages, a suit under Section 77