This paper critically analyses the landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India in Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana (2012), which addressed the legality of transferring immovable property through General Power of Attorney (GPA), Agreement to Sell, and Will transactions, collectively referred to as GPA sales. Adopting a doctrinal and analytical research methodology, the study examines the statutory framework under Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908, alongside judicial interpretations governing property transfers in India. The Court unequivocally held that GPA-based transactions do not confer ownership rights and cannot substitute a duly executed and registered conveyance deed, thereby reaffirming the mandatory nature of registration for transfers exceeding one hundred rupees. The judgment further clarified the legal character of a General Power of Attorney as an instrument of agency, incapable of transferring any proprietary interest. Through a detailed evaluation of the Court’s reasoning, this paper highlights the judicial rejection of informal property transactions designed to evade stamp duty, registration requirements, and regulatory restrictions. The analysis demonstrates that the ruling not only resolves longstanding ambiguities but also strengthens legal certainty, safeguards bona fide purchasers, and curtails fraudulent practices and the circulation of unaccounted money in the real estate sector. The decision significantly contributes to Indian property law jurisprudence by reinforcing statutory compliance, aligning market practices with legal mandates, and emphasizing the role of public policy in regulating property transactions.