2012 AIR CC 2828 (PAT) ::(2013) 1 ICC 577

Patna High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): Mungeshwar Sahoo , J

( A ) Evidence Act (1 of 1872) S. 80 — Registration Act (16 of 1908), S. 17 — Registered partition deed — Presumption as to genuineness — Suit for partition — Plea that former partition deed was obtained by playing fraud or undue influence or coercion — Finding of Subordinate Court that stamp for partition deed was purchased and on same day contents thereof was written — Deed presented for registration within 4 days — Plaintiff’s admission regarding signature in registration office about execution of said deed — Merely on basis that plaintiff put his L. T. I. in year 1959, no signature could have been put by him in year 1975, not tenable — Deed being registered, it would be presumed to have been validly executed with until presumption is rebutted. (Paras11)

( B ) Limitation Act (36 of 1963) Art. 59 — Applicability — Art. 59 would apply to cases where document is prima facie valid document — If document is void ab initio then Art. 59 would not be applicable — Plea that his signature obtained on registered partition deed by inducing plaintiff — Document would be valid in case of failure to prove plea — Document not void ab initio — Art. 59 not applicable.

( C ) Specific Relief Act (47 of 1863) S. 34 — Relief of partition — Entitlement to — Registered partition deed proved to be valid document — Complete partition between parties in year 1975 — Plaintiff admitted that properties standing in name of his wife were not included in partition suit — Therefore, plea that property acquired by him is his self-acquired property and property acquired by respondent was joint family property, not tenable — Partition not admitted by plaintiff but plea raised that it was obtained by inducement — It was not plaintiff’s case that unequal share was given to him — Plaintiff not entitled to relief of partition. AIR 1991 Patna 276 and AIR 1991 Pat 95, Rel. on. (Paras13141517)