By analyzing the provision, we can understand that the document listed in it is an agreement for sale. Moreover, the fact that the agreement on the sale as such falls within the category of Article 17, paragraph 2, of the Registration Act as a non-binding document. To understand the conflict between RERA and Registration Act, it is important to understand the difference between the sale agreement and a deed of sale. A sale agreement is an instrument by which the seller agrees to transfer the property to a buyer if certain conditions are required, but does not create the buyer`s property on the property. In addition, an ATS does not require mandatory registration under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908 (Registration Act) as well. This can be inferred from the fact that the list of instruments requiring mandatory registration under Section 17 does not contain ATS. In all cases, paragraph 17, paragraph 2, excludes certain documents, including an ATS, from the applicability of sections 17(1) a) and 17 (1) b). An ATS is excluded as a document class in accordance with section 17(2) (v). In addition, the explanatory note in Section 17 also states that a document that establishes or commissions a contract for the sale of real estate is not considered to have a registration obligation or is never required. Although the RERA Act of 2016 provides for a non-fruit clause in Section 89 and applies as a result of the same RERA through the Registration Act 1908. On the other hand, it also raises another question as to whether a sale agreement creates a right, title or interest in the property? Therefore, we can say that the provisions of the RERA Act 2016 apply as a priority to the Registration Act 2016 only with respect to the sale agreement.

A real estate sale agreement that provides for the sale on terms agreed between the parties (sales contract or ATS) does not in itself create any interest in the property or a charge. Section 54 of the Property Transfer Act, 1882 (TPA), defines the sale as a transfer of ownership at a price and provides that the sale of land worth more than 100 INR (cent) can only be done by a registered instrument. It should be noted that section 54 does not provide for the mandatory registration of the deed of sale, that is, the instrument used for the sale of real estate, but does not require the registration of the ATS. Section 13, paragraph 1 of the RERA Act 2016 states that “the project proponent may not accept more than 10% of the cost of the dwelling, land or building, as it may amount in this case in the form of an advance or a person`s application fee without first entering into a written sales agreement with that person and registering the agreement for sale under current legislation.” Therefore, it should be concluded that the RERA Act 2016 on the Law of Registration in Power must be sold for the purposes of the agreement, because the sale agreement does not provide clear title, but can be implemented in court, in accordance with the provisions of the RERA Act 2016. This question arises because the registration of documents is usually made to guarantee a clear right and ownership of the property to the buyer. A sale agreement as such does not constitute a clear property of the property. In the case of Durgawati Devi/Union of India2, the Supreme Court ruled that the execution of the sale contract did not entrust ownership of the property and that the property would be transferred only by transportation authorization.