1.it is valid. 2.You send a legal opinion to force the 3.If it does not, then take legal action for certain services as soon as possible, because there are already 2.5 years. valid only for 3 years. K.RENUGADEVI ADVOCATE If the sales statement is not registered, it is not valid. Although it may be taken as evidence under Section 49 of the Registration Act as evidence of a valid contract. There are a large number of projects in progress in which the developer may have asked the buyer for more than 10% of the cost of the property under the ATS and may have been donated by him, which were (in the absence of requirement) and are still not registered. In the absence of such a provision, there is ambiguity as to the validity and application of these unregistered ATSes, which are now legally required to be forcibly registered. Parliament must respond to the aforementioned ambiguity with an appropriate amendment to the law. Alternatively, the national governments concerned could address the issue in the internal regulation.

In the absence of a law, developers are well within their rights to defend themselves if, on the basis of an unregistered ATS, that the content of such an ATS cannot be read for the purposes of evidence, according to Section 49 of the Registration Act. Strictly speaking, Section 49 refers only to the non-registration of documents that are required to be registered mandatorly, either under Section 17 of the Registration Act or TPA. Section 13 of the Act is not explicitly in Section 49. However, it is questionable whether the purpose underlying the forced registration of a document is to impose a consequence of its non-registration and that, in this context, the non-registration provided for in Section 13 of the Act will follow that defined in Section 49 of the Registration Act. that the Allottees cannot avail themselves of such a document (UNregistered ATS) and request its application because of the lack of registration. In the absence of a provision of the law, it may be difficult to rebut such a legal defence. Section 49 of the Registration Act is new and for the first time imposes legislative sanctions on the just doctrine of partial delivery. This part of the law is widely accepted in its own right that a legal action for a given benefit may be for sale on the basis of an unregord agreement and may be admissible as evidence.

The Section 49 document, which was an unreged document, could be included as evidence of a contract in a lawsuit for a given benefit. Hon`ble Justice Badar Durrez Ahmed and Hon`ble Justice Siddharth Mridul approved the conclusion of Section 49 of the Registration Act of the Learned Single Judge, in which the unregord sales agreement could be obtained in evidence by Vinod Kumar-Anr. against Ajit Singh. Section 17 (1A)[1] of the Registration Act, 1908 provides that “documents containing contracts that transfer contracts for a fee, any real estate within the meaning of Section 53A of Property Law, 1882, are registered if they were executed on or after the start of the Registration and Other Related Laws (Amendment) Act, 2001, and that such documents are not recorded on or after that date. , they have no effect for the purposes of Section 53A.”