In H.P. Puttaswamy v Thimmamma & Ors, the Supreme Court discussed Section ……. Of Registration Act

A Section 23 Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
B Section 32 Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
C Section 35 Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
D Section 43 Correct Answer Incorrect Answer


In H.P. Puttaswamy v Thimmamma & Ors, the Supreme Court considered whether the presence of the purchaser of an immovable property is required before the concerned body under the Act when a deed is registered in conveyance in compliance with the Act. The issue in this case concerned a 4,500-square-foot property in the village of Hittanahalli Koppalu in the Malavallu Taluk of Karnataka (the “Suit Property”). It was discovered that this property had been the subject of two separate selling deeds. On March 31, 1989, the appellant filed a lawsuit to be recognized as the rightful owner of the suit property. The plaintiff’s deed had brought the appellant into possession of the suit as a tenant and later as a purchaser. The Supreme Court cited section 32 of the act, stating that, aside from the exceptions established by Sections 31,88, and 89 of the Act, if a document is being registered, regardless of whether it is mandatory or optional, it would require either: 1)    some person signing the agreement or claiming rights under it, or 2)    such a person’s representative or assignee, or 3)    by the agent or representative of such a person who has a duly approved power of attorney to appear before the relevant authorities under the Act. A simple reading of Section 32 reveals that neither party to a sale deed is required to appear before the relevant authority under the Act. And, because the conveyance deed did not fall within the exceptions set forth in section 32, the Supreme Court dismissed the case without interfering with the High Court’s decision, clarifying that Section 32 does not require the presence of both parties to a sale deed when it is submitted for registration to the appropriate authority under the Act.

Practice Next