The Supreme Court, in M3M v. Directorate of Enforcement, permitted substitution of immovable property attached under the PMLA with alternate immovable assets of equal or higher value. A Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and R. Mahadevan allowed the real estate firm’s request to replace provisionally attached land with commercial units in its Gurugram project, valued at ₹317 crore, as confirmed by the ED. The Court imposed conditions outlined in the ED’s affidavit and disposed of the SLP. This ruling, building on Revati Cements v. UOI, expands the principle of substitution from fixed deposits to immovable property, balancing enforcement under PMLA with the need to ensure continuity of commercial projects.

The Supreme Court in Vinod Infra Developers Ltd. v. Mahaveer Lunia & Ors. reaffirmed that an agreement to sell, without a suit for specific performance, cannot confer ownership or title in immovable property. A Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan held that only a registered sale deed can legally convey title under Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The Court rejected the respondent’s reliance on a 2014 agreement to sell and a revoked PoA, reiterating that such documents are not conveyances. Citing Suraj Lamp and other precedents, the Court emphasized that agreements to sell cannot substitute a registered deed of conveyance.