SATISH KUMAR versus ZARIF AHMED AND ORS.

Citation: [1997] 2 S.C.R. 336 · Decided: 20-02-1997 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, S. SAGHIR AHMAD · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
SATISH KUMAR 
v. 
ZARIF AHMED AND ORS. 
FEBRUARY 20, 1997 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND S. SAGHIR AHMAD, JJ.] 
Rent and Eviction : 
Transfer of Property Act, 1882/Registration Act, 1908/Stamp Act, 1899: 
Ss. 3 and 53-A/ss. 17(1)(d)/2(14)--Lease deed-Unregistered lease of 
immovable property for 11 months-Held, is admissible in evidence to con-
sider the effect of immovable property contained therein or to receive as an 
evidence of any transaction vis-a-vis such property-Decree of ejectment of 
tenp.nt passed by trial court restored. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 383 of 
1984. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 21.10.82/9.8.83 of the 
Allahabad High Court in C.R. 3613 of 1978. 
Manoj Goel for R.P. Singh for the Appellant. 
Shakil Ahmed Syed for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
F 
This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the Al-
lahabad High Court, made on October 2, 1982 and August 9, 1983 in Civil 
Revision No. 3613/78. 
The admitted position is that the appellant-landlord had entered into 
an agreement of lease with the respondent-tenant on August 30, 1969 for 
G a period of 11 months for rent @ Rs. 220 per mensem. Notice of demand 
for arrears and also for termination of tenancy for non-payment was 
delivered to the respondent on April 8, 1972. Thereafter, the appellant filed 
suit on the small cause side for ejectment of the respondent. The trial Court 
decreed the suit on May 19, 1977. The tenants then filed the revision in the 
H High Court. The learned single Judge referred the following two questions 
336 
}-
---f 
-
-
SATISH KUMAR v. ZARIF AHMED 
337 
for decision by a Division Bench : 
"1. Whether any. term of a lease deed required under Section 107 
of the Transfer of Property Act to be registered, could be pressed 
into service for a collateral purpose within the meaning of the 
provision to Section 49 of the India Registration Act? 
2: Whether, in the instant case the relationship of landlord and 
tenant, the rate of rent and the period for which the original lease 
has been granted could be looked into as a collateral purpose 
under the proviso to Section 49 of the Indian Registration Act?" 
A 
B 
The Division Bench has answered the reference and held that the C 
lease deed is inadmissible evidence can cannot be looked into and oral 
evidence in proof of the tenancy is also inadmissible. After the reference 
was answered, the learned single Judge, following the reference order, 
allowed the revision and set aside the decree of eviction. Thus, this appeal 
~~~~. 
D· 
The only question that arises for consideration is : whether the 
unregistered lease deed is admissible in evidence Section 17(1)( d) of the 
Registration Act postulates Thus : 
"(1) the following document shall be registered if the property to E 
which it relates is situate in a district in which, and if it may have 
been executed on or after the date on which, act No. XVI of 1864, 
or the Indian Registration Act, 1866, or the Indian Registration 
Act 1871 or the Indian Registration Act, 1877, or the Indian 
Registration Act, 1908 came or comes into force, namely ----
(b) leases of immovable property from year to year, or for any term 
exceeding one year, or reserving a yearly rent." 
F 
"Instrument" has been defined in Section 2(14) of the Indian Stamp 
Act, 1899 postulating that "(I)nstrument includes every document by which G 
any right or liability is, or purports to be created, transferred, limited, 
extended extinguished or record. 
Section 3 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1982 (for short the 'TP 
. Act') also defines "instrument" to mean a non-testamentary instrument. 
Section 107 of the TP Act regulates how lease is to be made. The first part H 
338 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1997] 2 S.C.R. 
A thereof provides that a lease of im.movable property from year to year, or 
for any term exceeding one year, or reserving a yearly rent, can be made 
only by a registered instrument. The second part thereof gives exception 
to the first part and provides that all other lease of immovable property 
may be made either by a registered instrument or by oral agreement 
B accompanied by delivery of possession. 
The question, therefore, that arises is : whether a lease of immovable 
property from month to month or for 11 months is a compulsorily 
registerable document, though it was reduced to writing as an instrument 
defined under Section 2(14) of the Stamp Act? A conjoint re

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.