When we analyze the provision, we can understand that the document contained therein is a sales agreement. It is also stated that the sales agreement as such falls within the category of Article 17(2) of the Law on registration as a non-mandatory document. This question arises because the registration of documents is usually carried out in order to guarantee the buyer a clear right and ownership over the property. A sales agreement as such does not clearly determine the ownership of the property. In Durgawati Devi v Union of India2, the Supreme Court ruled that the performance of the contract of sale does not transfer ownership/title to the property and ownership/ownership is only transferred by a transfer instrument. Although the RERA Act 2016 has a non-obstante clause in sec 89 and becomes applicable as a result of the same RERA through the Registration Act 1908. On the other hand, it also acts on other issues, for example if a sales agreement creates a right, title or interest in the property? If the sales contract is unfounded, another question arises as to whether the buyer can remedy it in the event of a breach of the sales agreement. This received a response under Article 18 of the RERA Act, which states that the developer must compensate the buyer if he was unable to complete the project and hand over the property within the deadlines set in the sale or purchase agreement. If the developer does not do so, they can file a complaint with the RERA Authority3 and claim compensation. If it is breached by the Authority`s order, it may appeal to the Real Estate Regulatory Appellate Tribunal, in accordance with section 44 of the RERA Act 2016. To understand the conflict between RERA and Registration Act, it is important to understand the difference between the sales agreement and a sales document.