1

Subject :    Various provisions relating to execution and 
registration of documents.

Sub­Topics.

1. Meaning of execution.

2. Meaning of attestation.

3. Categories of documents requiring compulsory 
registration.

4. Purpose of registration of documents.

5. Admissibility of unregistered documents, which 
requires compulsory registration.

6. Evidentiary value of insufficiently stamped 
documents.

7. Presumptive value of registered document.

8. Certified copies of registered document.

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
                                     

  Introduction :­

         The Registration Act is one of the oldest legislations made
during pre­Independence period that are being implemented in
almost all parts of the country without altering substantially for
more than last 100 years. The Registration Act, 1908 is having
object of proper recording and registration of documents, which
 2

give them more authenticity. Registration means recording of the
contents   of   a   document   with   a   Registering   Officer   and
preservation   of   copies   of   original   documents.   Documents   are
registered for the purpose of conservation of evidence, assurance
of title, publicity of documents and prevention of fraud. 

           The transfer of a immovable property is a major cause
of litigation. Many  times, the dispute arises due to the fact that
the document, by which title is transferred, was not registered/
not   sufficiently   stamped.   Hence,   the   Registration   Act   and
Transfer of property Act deals with the manner in which the title
in   the   property   can   be   transffered.   An   important   aspect   of
execution   of   a   document   is   attestation   of   the   document.
Similarly,   section   17   of   Registration   Act   provides   the   list   of
documents which require compulsory registration. The paper also
deals with the purpose of registration of documents, evidentiary
value of unregistered document/insuffiently stamped document
and   the   effect   of   non­registration   of   documents   which   require
registration .

1. Meaning of execution.

The Oxford dictionary meaning of word 'Execution' is the
action of executing a plan, order, or a legal instrument. Execution
means the accomplishment of a thing, the completion of an act or
instrument. Hence, the plain meaning of the word 'Execution' is
the process of completion or accomplishment of an act. Here, we
have to see the meaning of the term 'execution' with regard to the
documents in legal sense.   
 3

A   reading  of  Section  68    of Evidence  Act  will  show  that

`attestation' and `execution' are two different acts one following
the other. There can be no valid execution of a document which,
under the law, is required to be attested without the proof of its
due attestation and if due attestation is   not proved, the fact of
execution is of no avail.

It   is   thus   a   settled   legal   position   that   merely   admitting

signature   on   the   document   does   not   amount   to   admission   of
execution of a document. 

In   law,   the   term   'execution'   has   not   been   defined

specifically.   In   normal   parlance,   the   execution   of   a   document
means   signing   the   same.   It   has   been   observed   in   the   case   of
Bhavanji v. Devji(ILR(1894) 19 Bom 635 that, execution means
signing, sealing and delivery of a document. The term may be
defined as  a  formal completion  of a deed. It  is the last act or
series   of   acts   which   complete   it.   It   has   been   held   in  State   of
Orissa  v.   Khetra   Mohan   Singh(AIR   1965   ORISSA   126)  that,
the execution of document means that the executant must have
signed or put his thumb impression, only after the contents of the
document   have   been   fully   stated   and   read   by   the   executant
before he put his signature thereon. Mere admission of the initial
by the executent would not tantamount to an admission of the
document. 

In    Dattatraya   vs.   Rangnath   Gopalrao   Kavthekar,   AIR

1971 Supreme Court 2548, it was observed that ordinarily, no
one is expected to sign a document without knowing its contents,
but if it is pleaded that the party who signed the document did
 4

not   know   the   contents   of   document   then,   it   may,   in   certain

circumstances,   necessary   for   the   party   seeking   to   prove   the
document, to place material before the court, to satisfy it that,
the   party   who   signed   the   document   had   the   knowledge   of   its
contents.  

Execution   of   a   document   is   to   be   proved   by   admissible

evidence i.e. 

1. admission, by a signatory to the document, of its 
execution ( Section 58 of Indian Evidence Act.).  
2. Examination of the scribe (Section 67).                    
3. Examination of an attesting witness (Sections 67 & 
68).
4. By proof of signature and handwriting of a person, 
who is alleged to have signed or written the 
document  produced (Section 67)                             
5. By   proof   of   digital   signature   (Section   67­A).
6. By opinion as to, or comparison of, signature, writing 
or seal with others admitted or proved documents. 
(Section 45)                                                              
7. Proof as to verification of digital signature (Sec.73A).

    2.     Meaning of attestation.

   According to section 3 of Transfer of Property Act 1882,
term “attested”, in relation to an instrument, means and shall be
deemed always to have meant attested by two or more witnesses,
each of whom has seen the executant sign or affix his mark to the
instrument, or has seen some other person sign the instrument in
 5

the   presence   and   by   the   directions   of   the   executant,   or   has

received from the executant, a personal acknowledgment of his
signature or mark, or of the signature of such other person, and
each   of   whom   has   signed   the   instrument   in   the   presence   of
executant; but it shall not be necessary that more than one of
such witnesses shall have been present at the same time, and no
particular form of attestation shall be necessary.

 It is essential that the witness should have put his signature
“ammo attestandi” i.e. for the purpose of attesting that he has
seen   the   executant   sign   or   has   received   from   him   a   personal
acknowledgement of his signature. If a person puts his signature
on the document for some other purpose, e.g to certify that he is
scribe   or   an   identifier   or   a   registering   officer,   he   is   not   an
attesting witness.(M.L.Abdul Sahib vs H B Venkata Sastri AIR
1969 SC 1147.)

In    Ishwar  Das  Jain Vs.  Sohan  Lal  AIR  2000 Supreme

Court   426  it   was   held   that,   the   mode   of   proof   of   document
required to be attested is contained in sections 68 to 71 of the
Evidence Act.   Under Section 68, if the execution of document
requires to be attested is to be proved, it will be necessary to call
an   attesting   witness,  if  alive  and  subject  to  the   process  of  the
court   and   is   capable   of   giving   evidence.     But   in   case   the
document is registered, then except in the case of a will, it is not
necessary to call an attesting witness, unless the execution has
been specifically denied by the person by whom it purports to
have been executed. 

The   attestor   must   be   independent.     In   case   of  Kumar

 6

Harish   Chandra   Singh   Deo   and   another   Vs.   Bansidhar

Mohanty and others AIR 1965 Supreme Court 1738, it is held
that a party to an instrument cannot be a valid attesting witness,
as such, party cannot attest its own signature.  

3.      Categories of documents requiring compulsory      
registration.

Section   17   of   Registration   Act   1908   gives   the   list   of

documents requiring compulsory registration. It runs thus­

      (1) The following documents shall be registered, 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,   1866,   or   the
Indian   Registration   Act,   1871,   or   the   Indian   Registration   Act,
1887 or this Act came or comes into force, namely :­

a) instruments of gift of immovable property;

b) other non­testamentary instruments which purport or
operate to create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish, whether in
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) non­testamentary 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 

d) leases of immovable property from year to year, or for
 7

any term exceeding one year, or reserving a yearly rent;

         (e) non­testamentary instruments transferring or assigning
any decree or order of a court or any award when such decree or
order   or   award   purports   or   operates   to   create,   declare,   assign
limit   or  extinguish, whether in 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,

Provided   that   the   State   Government   may,   by   order

published in the Official Gazette, exempt from the operation of
this sub­section any leases executed in any district, or part of a
district, the terms granted by which do not exceed five years and
the annual rent reserved by which do not exceed fifty rupees.

Sub   section   2   gives   the   list   of   documents   which   do   not

require registration.

As per section 3 of Registration(Maharashtra Amendment )
Act 2010 following clauses are added after clause (e) of section
17(1)   of   the   Registeration   Act   providing   for   registeration   of
documents mentioned therein,

(f)        Agreement relating to deposit of title deeds, where such
deposit has been made by way of security for the repayment of a
loan or an existing or future debt                               

(g)         sale certificate issued by competent officer or authority
under any recovery Act

(h)     irrevocable   power   of   attorney   relating   to   transfer   of

immovable   property   in   anyway,   executed   on   or   after   the
 8

commencement   of   Registration(Maharashtra   Amendment)   Act

2010.

Section   17   (1)     (1A)   :  The   documents     containing

contracts to transfer for consideration, any immovable property
for the purpose of section 53­A of the transfer of   Property Act,
1882 shall be registered if  they have been executed on or after
the   commencement   of   the   registration   and   other   related   law
(Amendment)   Act,   2001,   and   if   such   documents   are   not
registered on or after such commencement then, they shall have
no effect for the purposes of the said Section 53­A. 

The documents registrable under the Act fall under three
categories.   In   the  first   category,   documents   relating   to
transactions   which,   according   to   the   substantive   law,   can   be
effected only by registered documents. The Registration Act does
not lay down that any transaction, in order to be valid, must be
effected by a registered instrument only. What it provides is that
when there is a written instrument evidencing a transaction, it
must,   in   certain   cases,   be   registered.   Sale   deeds,   Mortgages,
Exchanges, Gifts and Leases under Transfer of Property Act, 1882
are required to be effected only by registered instruments subject
to   an   exception   in   case   of   some   transactions   relating   to
immovable property of less than  ₹ 100/­ in value. Under section
17   of   the   Registration   Act,   the   list   of   compulsorily   registrable
documents are given.

Second   category:   Certain   transactions   can   be   effected

without writing, i.e. partitions, releases, settlements etc. But, if
the   transaction   is   evidenced   by   a   writing   and   relates   to
 9

immovable property, the Registration Act steps in and clauses (b)
and (c) of Section 17(1) of said Act require registration of such
documents, subject to the exception specified in sub­section 2 of
that section. If an authority to adopt is conferred in writing, other
than a Will, it is also required to be registered vide section 17(3).

Third category: It is open to the parties, if they so choose, 
to get certain documents registered at their option and this is 
permitted by section 18. ‘Will’ need not be registered but it is 
open to the parties to get it registered under the third category.

In Naginbhai P. Desai V/s Taraben A. Sheth, A I R 2003 
Bom. 192 it is held that the agreement for sale cannot be treated 
as conveyance for the purpose of Indian Registration Act, 1908. 
There is no force in contention that agreement for sale was 
compulsorily registrable under Clause (b) to sub­section (1) of 
Section 17 of the Registration Act. 

Power of Attorney :

In Syed Abdul Khader V/s Rami Reddy, (1980) 2 S C C 601,
it is held that power of attorney need not be compulsorily 
registered. 

In Kashi Natsha V/s Narsingsha, A I R 1961 S C 1077 it is 
held that record of partition already made earlier needs no 
registration compulsorily. 

The   Registration   (Maharashtra   amendment)   Act,   2010

which   came   into   force   w.e.f.   01­03­2013   has   inserted   section
89(A)   in   the   Registration  Act.  It   provides  that   (1)  every   court
passing­ (a) any decree or order creating, declaring, transferring,
 10

limiting   or   extinguishing   any   right,   title   or   interest   to   or   in

immovable property in favour of  any person, or (b) an order for
interim attachment or attachment of immovable property or for
the   release   of   any   immovable   property   from   such   attachment,
shall, in accordance with the rules made in this behalf, send a
copy   of   such   decree   or   order   together   with   a   memorandum
describing   the   property   as   far   as   may   be   practicable,   in   the
manner required by section 21, to the registering officer within
the local limits of whose jurisdiction, the whole or any part of the
immovable   property   comprised   in   such   decree   or   order   is
situated, and such officer shall file the copy of the memorandum
in his Book No.1.

Due   to   this   amended   section,   (i)   any   decree   or   order

effecting an immovable property or (ii) any order of attachment
of immovable property or release from any such attachment, the
court   passing   such   decree/order   is  required   to   send   a  copy   of
such   decree/order   along   with   a   memorandum   describing
attached/affected   released   property,   to   the   registering   officer
(having jurisdiction over the immovable property ). This would
mean that all ad­interim and interim orders of attachment by any
of the competent  courts with respect to any immovable property
would be required to be registered.

In    Bhoopsing   Vs.   Ramsing   Major   AIR   1996   Supreme

Court   196  it   was   held   that   “   a   compromise   decree,   creating,
right, title or interest in immovable property valuing more than
Rs. 100/­ in favour of any party to the suit for the first time must
be registered.
 11

4.        Purpose of registration of documents
    :

  According   to   section   3   explanation   1   of   Transfer   of

Property Act 1882, where any transaction relating to immovable
property   is   required   by   law   to   be   and   has   been   effected   by   a
registered instrument, any person acquiring such property or any
part of, or share or interest in, such property shall be deemed to
be have notice of such instrument as from the date of registration
or, where the property is not all situated in one sub­district, or
where the registered instrument has been registered under sub­
section (2) of section 30 of Indian Registration Act 1908, from
the earliest date on which any memorandum of such registered
instrument has been filed by any Sub­Registrar within whose sub­
district any part of the property which is being acquired, or of the
property   wherein   a   share   or   interest   is   being   acquired,   is
situated . 

The purposes of Registration Act are as follows:

i) To provide information to people, who may deal with 
property, as to the nature and extent of the rights which      
persons   may   have   affecting   that   property.  
ii) To enable people to find out whether any particular piece
of property, with which they may be concerned, has been 
made subject to some particular legal obligation. 

iii) To prevent fraud. 

iv) To   prevent   forgeries   and   procurement   of   conveyances,  

mortgages by fraud or undue influence. 

v) The   real   purpose   of   registration   is   to   secure   that   every

 12

person   dealing   with   property,   where   such   dealings   require

registration,   may   rely   with   confidence   upon   the   statements
contained   in   the   register   as   full   and   complete   account   of   all
transactions by which his title may be affected, unless indeed  he
has actual notice of some unregistered transaction which may be
valid apart from registration. 

The   Honble   Apex   Court   in  Suraj   Lamp   vs     State   of

Haryana,   AIR   2012   SC   206,  in   para   10,   has   made   certain
observations   which   deal   with   purpose   of   registration   of
documents. Those observations are as follows:

“ 10. In the earlier order dated 15.5.2009, the objects and benefits
of   registration   was   explained   and   we   extract   them   for   ready
reference: 

The Registration Act, 1908, was enacted with the intention of
providing   orderliness,   discipline   and   public   notice   in   regard   to
transactions   relating  to  immovable   property  and  protection  from
fraud   and   forgery   of   documents   of   transfer.   This   is   achieved   by
requiring compulsory registration of certain types of documents and
providing for consequences of non­registration.

Section   17   of   the   Registration   Act   clearly   provides   that   any

document (other than testamentary instruments) which purports or
operates to create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish whether in
present or in future "any right, title or interest" whether vested or
contingent of the value of Rs.100 and upwards to or in immovable
property shall be registered..

Section 49 of the said Act provides that no document required
 13

by Section 17 to be registered shall, affect any immovable property
comprised   therein   or   received   as   evidence   of   any   transaction
affecting such property, unless it has been registered. Registration of
a document gives notice to the world that such a document has been
executed.

Registration   provides   safety   and   security   to   transactions

relating   to   immovable   property,   even   if   the   document   is   lost   or
destroyed.   It   gives   publicity   and   public   exposure   to   documents
thereby  preventing forgeries and frauds in regard to transactions
and execution of documents. Registration provides information to
people who may deal with a property, as to the nature and extent of
the rights which persons may have, affecting that property. In other
words, it enables people to find out whether any particular property
with   which   they   are   concerned,   has   been   subjected   to   any   legal
obligation   or   liability   and   who   is   or   are   the   person/s   presently
having right, title, and interest in the property. It gives solemnity of
form and perpetuate documents which are of legal importance or
relevance by recording them, where people may see the record and
enquire and ascertain what the particulars are and as far as land is
concerned  what   obligations exist  with regard to them. It  ensures
that every person dealing with immovable property can rely with
confidence   upon   the   statements   contained   in   the   registers
(maintained under the said Act) as a full and complete account of
all transactions by which the title to the property may be affected
and secure extracts/copies duly certified.

Registration  of documents makes the process of verification
and certification of title easier and simpler. It reduces disputes and
 14

litigations to a large extent.”

5. Admissibility   of   unregistered   documents  which   require

compulsory registration : 

Order XIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides
that,     the     court   may,   at   any     stage   of   the   suit,   reject   any
document     which   it   considers   irrelevant   or     otherwise
inadmissible. 

The   main   provision   in   section   49   of   the   Registration   Act

provides that any document which is required to be registered,
shall not affect any immovable property comprised therein nor
such document shall be received as evidence of any transaction
affecting   such   property.   The   proviso   would   show   that   an
unregistered   document   affecting   immovable   property   and
required by the Registration Act or the Transfer of Property Act,
to be registered may be received as an evidence to the contract in
a suit for specific performance or as evidence of any collateral
transaction.   Therefore,   an   unregistered   sale   deed   of   an
immovable   property   of   value   of   Rs.100/­   and   more   could   be
admitted in evidence as evidence of  any collateral  purpose.

  In  K.B.   Saha   and   Sons   Pvt.   Ltd.   vs.   Development

Consultant,   2008   8   SCC   564,    Hon'ble  Apex   Court,   from   the
principles laid down in the various decisions, culled out following
principles:­ 

1.  A document required to be registered, if unregistered, is not
admissible in evidence under Section 49 of the Registration 
Act.
 15

2.  Such   unregistered   document   can   be   used   as   an  

evidence of collateral purpose as provided in the Proviso to 
Section 49 of the Registration Act.

3.  A collateral transaction must be independent of, or divisible
from,   the   transaction   of   which,   the   law   required  
registration.

4.  A   collateral   transaction   must   be   a   transaction   not   itself  

required to be effected by a registered document, that is, a 
transaction   creating   any   right,   title   or   interest   in  
Immovable property of the value of one hundred rupees  
and upwards.

5. If   a   document   is   inadmissible   in   evidence   for   want   of  

registration, none of its terms can be admitted in evidence 
and that to use a document for the purpose of proving an 
important   clause   would   not   be   using   it   as   a   collateral  
purpose.

In   case   of  Himendra   Rasiklal   Ghia   V/s   Subodh   Modi,

2008(6)   Mh.L.J.   886  it   is   held   that   in   case   of   unregistered
document which requires compulsory registration is inadmissible
in evidence.

In case of Bajaj Auto Limited Vs Behari Lal Kohli  (1989)
3 SCR, 730  it was held that, if a document purporting to create a
lease is inadmissible in evidence for want of registration, none of
the terms of the lease can be admitted in evidence and that to use
a document for the purpose of proving an important clause in the
lease is not using it as collateral purpose.                
 16

In  Anthony   vs.   K.C.   Ittoop   and   Sons   and   others,   AIR

2000 SC 3523, Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered collateral
effects of unregistered lease deed. It was held that such a lease
deed had caused two consequences, (1) that no lease exceeding
one year was created, (2) instrument became useless so far as
creation of the lease was concerned. Nonethless, the presumption
that the lease is not exceeding one year stood created by conduct
of parties remains unrebutted.

A   relinquishment   deed   is   compulsorily   registerable

document U/sec. 17(b) of Registration Act,1908 and hence the
unregistered document is not admissible in evidence. S.17(1)(b)
of the Registration Act mandates that any document which has
the effect of creating and taking away the rights in respect of an
immovable   property   must   be   registered   and   S.49   of   the   Act
imposes   bar   on   the   admissibility   of   an   unregistered   document
and deals with the documents that are required to be registered
u/sec. 17 of the Act.

  Section   49   of   Registration   Act   provides     effect   of   non

registration of document required to be compulsorily  registered.
It provides for using such unregistered document for collateral
purpose.  

In Ramlaxmi Vs Bank of Baroda, AIR 1953 Bombay 50, it
was held  that collateral transaction means ancillary or subsidiary
transaction   to   main   or   principal   transaction   and   collateral
purpose means bringing in existence collateral transaction. 

In   short,   a   document   required   to   be   registered   is   not

 17

admissible in  evidence even under section 49 of the Registration
Act.     Such  unregistered  document   can  however  be   used  as an
evidence of collateral purpose transacting collateral transactions
which are independent, divisible and which need no registration.

6. Evidentiary value of insufficiently stamped 
documents:  

The object of Bombay/Maharashtra Stamp Act 1958 is to 
collect stamp duty on an instruments which are made chargeable 
with duty. 

Impound means to keep in custody of the law. Section 33
provides   for   examination   and   impounding   of   documents.
According to said section, every person having by law or consent
of   parties   authority   to   receive   evidence,   and   every   person   in­
charge of a public office, except an officer of police, before whom
any   instrument,   chargeable,   in   his   opinion,   with   duty,   is
produced or comes in the performance in his functions shall, if it
appears   to   him   that   such   instrument   is   not   duly   stamped,
impound the same. On impounding and payment of insufficient
stamp with penalty the document can be admitted in evidence.

In  Thippareddy Obulamma vs. Balu Narasimhulu,
AIR 2003 A.P. 525, following propositions of law are stated with
regard   to   unstamped   or   understamped   or   unregistered
documents.­

a] An unstamped or insufficiently stamped document is
inadmissible in evidence ;

b] As per proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act,
 18

an   unregistered   document   affecting   immovable   property   and

required to be registered can be received as evidence either in
cases referred to therein or for collateral transaction.

c] An   unstamped   or   insufficiently   stamped   document

coupled with the infirmity of being unregistered can be received
as   evidence   for   a   collateral   purpose,   provided   the   first   defect
under the Stamp Act is corrected. In other words, on unstamped
or insufficiently stamped document, after being duly impounded
under   the   law,   can   be   relied   upon   for   collateral   purpose.
Aforesaid   observations   are   also   found   in  Pandurang
Dharmadhikari vs. Kusumtai  2014 6 BomCR 643 .

However,   in   another   decision   reported   in   the   matter   of

Mahendra   Madhav   vs.   Kailas   Bhauraoji,   2014   (5)   Mah   L.J.
807, having referred to Sec. 36 of the Bombay Stamps Act, 1958,
it  was held  that  once  the  insufficiently stamped document has
been   admitted   in   evidence;   admission   cannot   be   called   in
question   at   any   stage   of   the   same   suit   or   proceeding   on   the
ground that instrument has not been duly stamped.

In   case   of  Conwood   Agencies   Pvt.   Ltd.,   Vs.   Namdeo

Pandurang Panchal  (2005) 107 Bombay Law Reported 319 it
was observed that sub­section 1 of section 37 provides that, the
court has power to admit the document in evidence if the party
producing the same would pay the stamp duty together with a
penalty as provided by section 34 or duty as provided by section
36.     On   compliance,   it   is   requisite   to   forward   a   copy   of   the
document along with the amount collected to the Collector.  But
if   party   refuses   to   pay   the   aforesaid   amount,   the  court   has   to
 19

impound the document and forward the same to the Collector as
provided   under   section   37   of   said   act.   On   receipt   of   the
document,   it   is   for   the   Collector   to   make   inquiry   and   do   the
needful. 

In   case   of  Yellapu   Uma   Maheshwari   and   another   Vs.

Budha   Jagadheeswarao   and   others   2015   STPL   (Web)   2514
S.C.  (D.B.)  it   was  held  that   an  unregistered   document  can  be
relied upon for collateral purpose i.e. severance of title, nature of
possession of various shares etc on payment of requisite stamp
duty and the penalty.

However, photocopy of the document, though offered to be
impounded with showing readines to pay the deficit and penalty,
it cannot be termed as an instrument and section 33 of the Stamp
Act cannot be made applicable to the same. [Gayabai Vs. Hiralal
2011 (4) Mh.L.J.798]. In  Farook vs Kadeer Meman 2016(1)
Mh.L.J   867,  it   is   held   that,  when   document   was   produced   in
evidence by plaintiff, objection as to admissibility of document
can be raised when document is tendered in evidence and not
after same is marked as exhibit.

7.   Presumptive value of registered document :

  If   an   unstamped   or   insufficiently   stamped   document   is

received in a particular set of proceedings, before an adjudicatory
authority, its admissibility cannot be questioned at a later point
of time. 

  Proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act permits of an
unregistered document to be received in evidence, for collateral
 20

purposes; such a facility is not created under Stamp Act and it
was held in number of cases that an unstamped or insufficiently
stamped document or instrument cannot be received in evidence
even for collateral purpses. 

If   an   unregistered   document   is   received   as   evidence,   the

parties to the suit or proceeding can always urge at the time of
final hearing regarding the admissibility of the document. But, in
the case of improperly stamped or unstamped document being
offered as evidence in a suit, the Court has to necessarily decide
as and when objection is raised because, when once unstamped
document is admitted in evidence, at a later stage, the question
of inadmissibility cannot be raised. 

In the case of  Vimalchand Jain ...vs... Ramakant Jadoo
reported in 2009 (5) SCC 713,  it is held that a registered deed
of sale carries presumption that the transaction was a genuine
one.   If the execution of sale deed is proved,  onus is on the other
side to prove that the deed was not executed and it was a sham
transaction.  Thus, the burden to prove that it is not genuine lies
on the person who allges that it is not so.

Thus, the registration by itself, in all cases, is not proof of
execution; but, if no other evidence is available, the certificate of
registration   is  prima­facie  evidence   of   its   execution   and   the
certificate of the Registering Officer u/s.60 of the Registration Act
is relevant for proving the execution.  Ref ­ Irudayam Ammal vs
Salayath Mary, AIR 1973 Mad. 421,

In  Kashibai   Martand   ­Vs­   Vinayak   Ganesh   reported   in

 21

AIR 1956 BOM 65  the Hon'ble High Court has observed that,
Section 58  of the Registration Act provides for particulars to be
endorsed   on   documents   admitted   to   registration.   Under   Sub­
section   (1)   of   this   section,   on   every   document   admitted   to
registration, other than a copy of a decree or order, or a copy
sent   to   a   registering   officer   under  Section   39,  there   shall   be
endorsed,   from   time   to   time,   the   particulars   mentioned   in
Clauses (a), (b) and (c) of the said sub­section. Under Clause (a),
the   signature   and   addition   of   every   person   admitting   the
execution   of   the   document,   and,   if   such   execution   has   been
admitted by the representative, assignee or agent of any person,
the   signature   and   addition   of   such   representative,   assignee   or
agent, is required to be endorsed. Under Clause (c) of the said
sub­section, any payment of money or delivery of goods made in
the   presence   of   the   registering   officer   in   reference   to   the
execution   of   the   document,   and   any   admission   of   receipt   of
consideration,   in   whole   or   in   part,   made   in   his   presence   in
reference to such execution, is required to be endorsed. Clause
(b)   deals   with   the   signature   and   addition   of   every   person
examined   in   reference   to   such   document   under   any   of   the
provisions of the Act. 

Proviso to Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act provides
that, except for proving Will, there is no need to call attesting
witness for proving of document which is duly registered. Section
114(e) and (f) raise presumption that all the requisite procedure
for registration of document, as laid down by Registration Act, is
duly complied with when document so registered is produced on
 22

record. A registered adoption deed offers a presumption that the
adoption   is   valid.   However,   it   is   also   made   clear   that   such
presumption is rebutable.

8.  Certified copies of registered documents :    

Section   74   of   Indian   Evidence   Act   defines   public

documents.   Section   75   defines   private   documents.   Section   77
provides for production of certified copy of public documentfor
proving its contents.  However, private documents though kept in
public   record   as  contemplated  under  section  74(2)  have  to  be
proved like private document.  However, in view of section 60 of
the Registration Act, endorsement made  by registering officer on
such registered document has presumptive value. 

Section   65   (   c   )   (e)   of   the   Evidence   Act   provides   that

secondary   evidence   can   be   given   relating   to   documents   which
have   been   destroyed   or   lost   or   which   are   public   documents
within the meaning of Section 64 of the Evidence Act. 

In view of Section 60 (2) of the Registration Act, once the
certificate was issued, sealed and dated by the Registering Officer
and   certified   copy   along   with   the   sale­deed   was   obtained   and
filed, it would certainly be admissible in evidence for the purpose
of   proving   that   the   document   has   been   duly   registered   in   the
manner provided by the Registration Act. 

In Kalyan Singh V/s Chhoti, A I R 1990 S C 396 it
was held that when the document is registered, the ordinary copy
is not admissible as secondary evidence. So, only certified copy of
registered   copy   is   to   be   admitted   as   secondary   evidence   in
 23

absence of the original deed.

However,   law   does   not   say   that   a   certified   copy   of   a

registered agreement of sale is inadmissible in evidence; unless
parties  to  the   documents are  examined to prove  it. (  State   of
Haryana vs. Ram Singh, AIR 2001 S.C. 2532.) A certified copy
of a registered sale deed is admissible in evidence and does not
require to be proved by calling a witness. Ramappa vs. Bojappa,
AIR 1963 S.C. 1633.

 Conclusion  :

The   Registration   Act,   unlike   the   Transfer   of   property

Act,1882, strikes only at documents, and not at transactions. In
the same way, the Registration Act does not require that every
transaction affecting immovable property should be carried out
only through a registered instrument. All that it enacts is that,
when   a   document   is   employed   to   effectuate   any   of   the
transaction specified in section 17 of the Registration Act, such
document must be registered.  An unregistered document can be
used for collateral purposes as provided by section 49 of the Act.
The   objection   regarding   admissibility   of   instrument   not   duly
stamped has to be decided  then and there when the document is
tendered in evidence and before it is marked as an Exhibit in the
case.   Both  the   enactments aim  at  protecting the  civil  rights  of
parties executing documents. 

“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We
are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a
single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects
 24

all indirectly.” 
Martin Luther King., Jr.
With this we conclude the paper.

       (S.D.Jagmalani)
District Judge­1,Latur

            (P.K.Sharma)
District Judge­,3,Latur

 (S.M.Yallatti)
Adhoc District Judge­,Latur

(Smt.       Kanakdande)
Jt.CJSD,Latur

      (A.K.Deshmukh)
Jt. CJJD,Latur