2007 (2) AIR Bom R 743 ::2007 A I H C 1696

Bombay High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): S. B. Deshmukh , J

( A ) Hindu Law — Joint family property — Oral partition — Is permissible. (Paras10)

( B ) Maharashtra Land Revenue Code (41 of 1966) S. 149 , 150 — Certification of mutation entry — Joint family property — Oral partition — No dispute regarding partition — Mutation entry would not be required to be recorded in register of disputed mutations — It could be certified by Circle Inspector.Section 150 deals with the certification of the mutation. If mutation entry is disputed. It is recorded in the register of disputed mutations and has to be referred to the Tahsildar for decision. Such mutations are to be certified by the officer not below the rank of Avval Karkun. However, the mutation entries which are not disputed deliberately, have been provided to be certified by the officer, namely; Circle Inspector as provided under the first proviso to sub-section (6) of S. 150 of the Code. Here, it is not a case of defendant that there was/is any dispute regarding partition claimed by the plaintiffs. Therefore, there was no occasion for recording mutation entry in the register of disputed mutations. It was. Therefore, a mutation which could be certified bythe Circle Inspector. Said mutation entry is, therefore, legally certified by the Circle Inspector. (Paras10)

( C ) Specific Relief Act (47 of 1963) S. 38 — Perpetual injunction — Claim based on oral partition of joint family property — Certified mutation entry proving partition — Oral and documentary evidence showing that a plaintiff was in possession of suit property on basis of oral partition from date of partition — Plaintiff entitled to perpetual injunction. (Paras13)