AIR 1988 SUPREME COURT 881 ::(1988) 34 DLT 317 ::2018 (14) SCC 814 ::(1989) 2 Mad LW 98 ::(1989) 2 Mad LJ 18

Supreme Court Of India

(From: Delhi)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): A. P. Sen, B. C. Ray , JJ

Registration Act (16 of 1908) , S.17(1)(b), S.49— Transfer of Property Act (4 of 1882) , S.5— Family arrangement and partition - Distinction - Partition of ancestral properties - Subsequent memorandum of partition embodying factum of partition - Held, memorandum was only family arrangement and its registration was not necessary. Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.91— The plaintiffs and defendants belonged to two branches of the family and had joint ancestral properties. There was some partition and in a deed executed by the parties, the factum of partition was embodied. This deed was not registered. Dispute arose as to the admissibility of the deed in evidence. Held, that admittedly there was a partition by metes and bounds of the agricultural lands and the shares allotted to the two branches were separately mutated in the revenue records. There was thus a disruption of joint status. All that remained was the partition of the ancestral residential house. The document does not effect a partition but merely records the nature of the arrangement arrived at as regards the division of the remaining property. A mere agreement to divide does not require registration. But if the writing itself effects a division, it must be registered.(Para 16) It is well-settled that while an instrument of partition which opera....