A co-broked deal often starts on a phone call or a WhatsApp message: one broker has the buyer, the other has the property, and the two agree to share the brokerage. Property deals can take weeks or months to close, and by the time the brokerage is paid, two people can remember the agreed split differently. Writing the split down before the client is shared is the simplest way to prevent that argument.

Many brokers assume that only an agreement on stamp paper with ink signatures counts. The law is more specific than that. This article sets out what Indian statutes say about agreements made electronically and about electronic records as evidence, and what the Brokers99 app actually records when two brokers agree a split.

When an agreement is a contract

The test comes from the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Section 10 says all agreements are contracts if they are made by the free consent of parties competent to contract, for a lawful consideration and with a lawful object, and are not expressly declared void.[1] Paper is not one of those conditions, although the same section keeps in force any other law that requires a particular contract to be made in writing, before witnesses or registered.

The Information Technology Act, 2000 deals with electronic agreements directly. Section 10A says that where the proposal, its acceptance or their revocation are expressed in electronic form or by means of an electronic record, the contract shall not be deemed unenforceable solely because electronic form or means was used.[2] So a split agreed in an app or by email is not weaker merely for being electronic. It still has to meet the conditions in section 10 of the Contract Act.

Two things the law does not settle for you. Whether a particular agreement must also be stamped is a question for the stamp law that applies in your state. And no statute tells two brokers what split to agree: that is a commercial term between them.

Electronic records as evidence: the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

An earlier version of this article pointed to section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. That Act has been repealed by section 170 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, and the rules on electronic records are now in sections 61 to 63 of the new Act.[3]

  • Section 61. An electronic or digital record cannot be refused as evidence on the ground that it is electronic, and, subject to section 63, it has the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as any other document.[3]
  • Section 63(1) and (2). A printout or copy of an electronic record (the "computer output") is treated as a document and can be admitted without producing the original, if conditions are met. Broadly: it came from a computer or communication device used regularly for that activity, the information was fed in during the ordinary course of the activity, and the device was working properly or any fault did not affect the record.[3]
  • Section 63(4). When a statement in an electronic record is given in evidence under this section, a certificate must be submitted with the record each time it is offered. The certificate identifies the record and describes how it was produced, and it is signed by a person in charge of the device or of the relevant activity and by an expert, in the form set out in the Schedule to the Act.[3]

For a broker, the practical point is simple: keep the agreement, and the messages about it, in a system that records what was said and when, and expect that relying on them in a dispute will need that certificate.

What the Brokers99 app records

Here is what the Brokers99 app actually does when two brokers work a deal together:

  • The split between two brokers. One broker proposes the split, the other agrees, and once both have agreed it locks. Agree it before either of you shares a client. There is no OTP on this step.
  • The MOU is a different document. The MOU in the Brokers99 app is the seller's exclusive sales mandate, signed by the seller. It is not an agreement between two brokers and does not record how they split the brokerage.
  • Your client stays yours. Network posts carry no client name, client numbers stay hidden, and you reveal one only with your PIN.

Good practice for any co-broked deal

  • Agree the split before you share the client. Settle the split, who pays whom and when, before you introduce your buyer or arrange a site visit.
  • Write down who brought whom. Most disputes are about which broker introduced the client, and what happens if the client comes back directly months later. Put the answer in the agreement.
  • Keep the record in one place, with dates. Keep the agreement and the messages about it together, not scattered across personal chats, so the history can be produced if it is ever needed.

Conclusion

An agreement between two brokers is not unenforceable merely because it was made electronically, and electronic records can be used as evidence under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 when its conditions are met. What protects a split is agreeing it clearly, before the client is shared, and keeping a dated record of it.