top of page
Search

A small Judgment, a big lesson: Assignment of specific performance decrees needs no registration

  • Writer: Lenin Raj
    Lenin Raj
  • 5 days ago
  • 4 min read


ree

Why this judgment matters

The Supreme Court has clarified that an unregistered assignment of a decree for specific performance is valid because such a decree does not, by itself, create any right, title, or interest in immovable property; it merely confers a right to seek enforcement through execution. This is a crisp reminder that consistent reading of daily Supreme Court judgments can yield fresh insights into how judges approach first-principles statutory interpretation insights that sharpen appellate strategy, drafting, and execution practice for those in Supreme Court legal services and Appellate practice India.

The judgment and Bench

  • Cause Title: Rajeswari & Ors. v. Shanmugam & Anr., Civil Appeal No. 13835 of 2025; 2025 INSC 1329; 2025

  • Bench: Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan; judgment authored by Justice K.V. Viswanathan, decided on 19 November 2025.

The judicial approach: first principles, not shortcuts

Justice K.V. Viswanathan’s opinion (for a Bench with Justice J.B. Pardiwala) is notable for returning to the architecture of Section 17(1)(e) of the Registration Act, 1908 and asking the right threshold question: does the decree being assigned “purport or operate to create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish” any right in immovable property? If the decree does not itself create any proprietary interest, an instrument assigning such a decree cannot attract compulsory registration. The Court synthesizes long-settled principles from Transfer of Property Act Section 54 and Suraj Lamp to underline that title passes only upon a duly stamped and registered conveyance; a decree for specific performance is not that conveyance.Rajeshwari-vs-Shanmugam.pdf​

Facts in brief

  • A 1993 ex parte decree for specific performance was assigned in 1995 by an unregistered deed to the respondent-assignee, who then sought execution for sale deed and possession.

  • The executing court accepted the objection of the judgment-debtor’s legal heirs and rejected execution, holding the assignment required registration, relying on K. Bhaskaram (AP High Court).

  • The High Court reversed, holding that the assignment conveyed only the right to benefit from the decree and did not require registration; the Supreme Court has now affirmed the High Court.

The core holding

  • Section 17(1)(e) Registration Act triggers compulsory registration only when the decree being transferred “purports or operates” to create or affect proprietary rights; a decree for specific performance does not do so.Rajeshwari-vs-Shanmugam.pdf​

  • A specific performance decree is akin to a preliminary stage equitable, executory, and controlled by the court until conveyance; it does not by itself transfer ownership or create interest in the property.Rajeshwari-vs-Shanmugam.pdf​

  • Therefore, an assignment of such a decree does not require registration; Order XXI Rule 16 CPC permits the assignee to execute, subject to notice and objections.Rajeshwari-vs-Shanmugam.pdf​

Key doctrinal anchors

  • Nature of specific performance decree: It recognizes an enforceable claim but does not vest title; title passes only upon execution and registration of the sale deed, whether by the vendor or through court process.Rajeshwari-vs-Shanmugam.pdf​

  • Contract survives decree: Section 28 Specific Relief Act recognizes that even after decree, the contract is not extinguished; rescission or further directions may follow depending on readiness and willingness and compliance with terms.Rajeshwari-vs-Shanmugam.pdf​

  • Suraj Lamp principle: An agreement to sell “does not, of itself, create any interest in or charge on” the property; conveyance alone transfers ownership; Section 54 TPA governs.

Addressing policy objections

The appellant’s concern that parties could avoid stamp/registration by serially assigning decreeswas rejected: absent execution and registration of a conveyance, no title passes; thus, there is no revenue loss by the mere assignment of a decree. This reinforces the bright-line distinction between transferring the decree (a procedural/equitable right to seek enforcement) and transferring the property (which requires a registered sale deed).

Practical takeaways for litigators

  • Execution planning: Where a decree for specific performance has been assigned in writing, ensure compliance with Order XXI Rule 16 notice; registration of the assignment is not required for maintainability of execution.Rajeshwari-vs-Shanmugam.pdf​

  • Drafting assignments: Frame the assignment to clearly transfer “rights and interests arising out of the decree,” not any property interest; keep consideration, decree details, and the right to seek execution precise.Rajeshwari-vs-Shanmugam.pdf​

  • Strategy in objections: Challenges should focus on O21 R16 compliance, readiness and willingness, or Section 28 rescission dynamics not on compulsory registration of the assignment deed for such decrees.Rajeshwari-vs-Shanmugam.pdf​

For clients and colleagues

For clients seeking Legal opinion for Supreme Court case or Supreme Court litigation services, this decision streamlines enforcement pathways where decrees have changed hands, and reduces avoidable technical objections in execution courts. For colleagues in appellate practice, the methodreading the text of Section 17(1)(e) alongside TPA Section 54, Suraj Lamp, and Specific Relief Act Section 28 shows how doctrinal coherence resolves procedural traps, a habit worth inculcating by reading one judgment every day.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court has settled that an assignment of a specific performance decree is enforceable without registration because the decree does not create any proprietary interest; ownership transfers only upon a duly registered conveyance executed in execution proceedings. This seemingly “small” ruling offers a big learning: careful statutory reading, anchored in property law fundamentals, can simplify execution practice and sharpen advocacy in Supreme Court legal services and Appellate practice India, while guiding clients through efficient, compliant pathways in Supreme Court litigation services.

Comments

Subscribe for updates

Thanks for submitting!

bottom of page