In such a situation, legal experts argue that the governments of the Länder should take strict measures, as they will also lose revenue. This absolute rule is subject to the exception provided for in Section 53A of the Transfer of Ownership Act. Section 53A provides that the seller has no right to disturb the ownership thus granted to the buyer, which is the subject of the transfer, while fully aerating to its part of the obligation of the contract. It should be noted that Article 53A offers the proposed buyer protection against the contemptuous and pours out the contemptuous of the buyer`s troublesome property, but it does not heal the buyer`s ownership of the property. Ownership of the property remains in the hands of the seller. The Hon`ble Punjab-Haryana High Court dismissed the appeal and expressed a respectful rejection of the Gurbachan Singh V judgment. Raghubir Singh, if there is a rule of law, if it is possible to order an appeal for a specific benefit on the basis of an unregistered sales agreement under sections 17(1A) and 49 of the Registration Act. The conflicts between two single Bench judgments were settled by the court. In the case of Gurbachan Singh V. Raghubir Singh, the hon`ble court ruled that the sales agreement acquired through the delivery of goods is inadmissible as evidence if it is not registered, but in the birham Pal & Ors case. V. Niranjan Singh & Ors.  The Tribunal decided that, on the basis of Article 49 of the Registration Act, such an agreement could form the basis of an appeal for a given service.
These two judgments are contradictory and run counter to the legal situation of two sections of the Indian Registration Act. .