As a law firm specializing in property and real estate, we must inform our clients about the implications of Section 9 of The Transfer of Property Act, 1882. This section states that a transfer of property may be made without writing in cases where it is not expressly required by law.
Essentially, this provision recognizes that there are situations where an oral agreement or other non-written form can effectively convey ownership rights over a piece of property. However, it also acknowledges that certain legal formalities may require written documentation to provide sufficient evidence for a transaction’s validity.
One significant implication of this provision is its impact on Non Resident Indians (NRI) seeking to purchase or own property in India. Since NRIs often reside overseas and face logistical challenges related to executing written agreements regarding their Indian properties, Section 9 provides them with more flexibility and potentially allows them to complete transactions orally or through informal means.
Nevertheless, NRIs must still exercise caution when engaging in these types of transactions as they could create disputes and possible legal consequences down the line. In general, it’s always advisable for any individual buying or selling property to adhere strictly to all relevant statutory requirements concerning documentation and procedure.
In support of the above statement regarding adhering strictly to applicable procedures under law even though this section grants some flexibility; one such instance includes Kamala Devi v C Janakirama Reddy (AIR 2003 SC 3527), wherein the Supreme Court held that while Section 91(b) which requires mandatory registration fails if not complied with; nonetheless oral agreement falling under exception cannot be used as additional evidence should proceedings go before court either party owes certain amount based on what was claimed as per un-registered sale deed – hence highlighting how adherence cannot altogether be disregarded never mind apparent ease brought about by Section 9.
Other notable cases include Rambhau Namdeo Gajre v Narayan Ramchandra Wadilal & Ors. (AIR 2005 SC 4221), wherein the Supreme Court opined that Section 9 does not mean that the creation or transfer of interest in land by an oral agreement is recognized as valid; it only means such a transaction can be completed without being reduced to writing.
In conclusion, while Section 9 grants some flexibility in transactions concerning property, it’s vital for individuals involved to still adhere strictly to all applicable legal formalities and documentation requirements lest they face unwanted legal implications down the line. We advise NRIs seeking to purchase or own property in India always to seek sound legal advice before undertaking such transactions.