1. Whether a registered document can be cancelled by a party unilaterally or not?

1) Arun Aggarwal vs. State of Haryana (25.10.2013 - PHHC) : MANU/PH/4665/2013,

2013 SCC OnLine P&H 26788 : (2014) 3 RCR (Civil) 335

An agreement of sale, lease or mortgage or partition may be cancelled with the consent of the
parties thereto. Because in the case of agreement of sale, lease, mortgage or partition, each of the
parties to the said document even after the execution and registration of the said deed retains
interest in the property and, therefore, it is permissible for them to execute one more document to
annual or cancel the earlier deed.

2) Hardip Kaur vs. Kailash and Ors : MANU/DE/2661/2012,

193(2012)DLT168
Please Refer Para 4 & 23

4. (vii) Any contract of sale (agreement to sell) which is not a registered deed of conveyance
(deed of sale) would fall short of the requirements of Sections 54 and 55 of Transfer of Property
Act and will not confer any title nor transfer any interest in an immovable property (except to the
limited right granted under Section 53A of Transfer of Property Act). According to Transfer of
Property Act, an agreement of sale, whether with possession or without possession, is not a
conveyance. Section 54 of Transfer of Property Act enacts that sale of immovable property can
be made only by a registered instrument and an agreement of sale does not create any interest or
charge on its subject matter.

23. (ii) The agreement to sell 'of itself' may not create any interest in the property under Section
54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 but the agreement along with the payment of the entire
sale consideration, handing over of the possession, execution of the receipt, affidavit, will,
indemnity bond and irrevocable General Power of Attorney create "an interest in the property"
within the meaning of Section 202 of the Contract Act. (iii) The words "an interest in property
which forms the subject matter of the agency" in Section 202 of the Contract Act, 1872 are of
wider amplitude than the words "an interest in or charge on such property" in Section 54 of the
Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Where the seller has received the sale consideration in pursuance
of the agreement to sell and has delivered the possession to the purchaser, the purchaser would
have interest in the property within the meaning of Section 202 of the Contract Act.

3) Pannalal Rathore and Ors. vs. W.H. Deeth (Ballabgarh) and Co. and Ors.
(16.05.2018 - DELHC) : MANU/DE/2049/2018, 2018 SCC OnLine Del 9309
Please Refer Paragraphs 10,11,13 & 14.

10. With effect from 24th September, 2001, the Stamp Act, 1899, Registration Act, 1908 and the
Transfer of Property Act, 1882 were amended and an agreement to sell immovable property,
under which possession of the property agreed to be sold is delivered in part performance of the
agreement to sell, has to be compulsorily registered and if not registered, the purchaser is
disentitled from taking the plea of being in possession in part performance of the agreement to
sell or from invoking Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. Thus the plaintiffs, owing to
the agreement to sell claimed by them in their favour being not registered, cannot claim any
other rights save as an agreement purchaser and cannot claim rights under Section 53A of the
Transfer of Property Act.

11. An agreement purchaser has no right in the property subject matter of the agreement, till a
decree for specific performance of the agreement to sell is passed in his favour and in pursuance
to the said decree a conveyance deed of the property is executed in his favour. Thus the
plaintiffs, as mere agreement purchasers of the premises of which they claim to be in possession
of, cannot claim any title or ownership rights to the property.

13. The plaintiffs as mere agreement purchasers of the premises or as tenant in the premises or in
unauthorized occupation/possession of the premises have no locus to sue for cancellation of the
agreement to sell entered into by the owner of the premises i.e. defendant No. 1 with others and
can have no reasonable apprehension that such instrument if left outstanding may cause the
plaintiffs serious injury. The only right of the plaintiffs as agreement purchasers is to sue for
specific performance of the said agreement to sell. The plaintiffs have already sued for specific
performance of the Agreement to Sell dated 12th June, 2008 in their favour.

14. The first reason is of the agreement to sell of which cancellation is sought being hit by lis
pendens. Presumably it is the case of the plaintiffs that the agreement to sell of which
cancellation is sought has been executed during the pendency of the suit for specific performance
of the agreement to sell filed by the plaintiffs. However, even if that be so, the same does not
entitle the plaintiffs to institute this suit. The principle of lis pendens, as far as India is concerned,
is enshrined in Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act and which inter alia provides that
during the pendency in any Court of any suit or proceedings in which any right to immovable
property is in question, the property cannot be transferred or otherwise dealt with by any party to
the suit or proceedings so as to affect the rights of any party thereto under any decree or order
which may be made therein except under authority of the Court and on such terms as it may
impose.

4) Satya Pal Anand vs. State of M.P. and Ors. (26.10.2016 - SC) :
MANU/SC/1359/2016, 2016 (10) SCC 767.
Please Refer Para 22, 27 & 31.

22. The role of the Sub-Registrar (Registration) stands discharged, once the document is
registered (see Raja Mohammad Amir Ahmad Khan (supra). Section 17 of the Act of 1908 deals
with documents which require compulsory registration. Extinguishment Deed is one such
document referred to in Section 17(1)(b). Section 18 of the same Act deals with documents,
registration whereof is optional. Section 20 of the Act deals with documents containing
interlineations, blanks, erasures or alterations. Section 21 provides for description of property
and maps or plans and Section 22 deals with the description of houses and land by reference to
Government maps and surveys. There is no express provision in the Act of 1908 which
empowers the Registrar to recall such registration. The fact whether the document was properly
presented for registration cannot be reopened by the Registrar after its registration. The power to
cancel the registration is a substantive matter. In absence of any express provision in that behalf,
it is not open to assume that the Sub-Registrar (Registration) would be competent to cancel the
registration of the documents in question. Similarly, the power of the Inspector General is limited
to do superintendence of registration offices and make Rules in that behalf. Even the Inspector
General has no power to cancel the registration of any document which has already been
registered.

27. The Registering Officer can refuse to register a document only in situations mentioned in
Sections such as 19 to 22, 32 and 35. At the same time, once the document is registered, it is not
open to the Registering Officer to cancel that registration even if his attention is invited to some
irregularity committed during the registration of the document. The aggrieved party can
challenge the registration and validity of the document before the Civil Court.

31. It was a case where the Registering Officer refused to register the deed of cancellation
presented before him on the ground that the cancellation deed was sought to be registered
without there being consent from the purchaser. The aggrieved person approached the Inspector
General of Registration who in turn issued a circular dated 5.10.2007 addressed to all the
Registering Officers in the State, that the deed of cancellation should bear the signatures of both
the vendor and the purchaser.