REGISTRATION ACT, 1908 — Sections 17 & 49 — Unregistered partition deed — Admissibility in evidence — Scope
Unregistered partition deed compulsorily registrable under Section 17(1)(b) of the Registration Act cannot be received in evidence to create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish rights in immovable property.
However, under the proviso to Section 49, such document may be received only for collateral purpose, subject to limitations.
(Paras 9–11)
REGISTRATION ACT, 1908 — Section 49 — Collateral purpose — Meaning and limits
Collateral purpose does not permit proof of partition, allotment of shares, creation or extinction of rights.
Collateral transaction must be independent of and divisible from the main transaction requiring registration.
Document cannot be used indirectly to establish what cannot be proved directly.
(Paras 11, 15–17)
CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE — Order XIII Rule 4 — Marking of document — Effect
Mere marking of a document as an exhibit does not amount to its admissibility in law.
Where objection relates to inherent inadmissibility of the document, such objection can be raised even after marking and even at later stages.
(Paras 17–18)
EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 — Sections 74 & 77 — Certified copy — Effect
Certified copy of an unregistered partition deed does not stand on higher footing than the original.
Benefit of Sections 35 and 36 of the Stamp Act cannot be extended to secondary evidence.
(Paras 12–14)
STAMP ACT — Sections 35 & 36 — Scope
Section 36 applies only where original instrument is admitted in evidence without objection.
Certified copies do not receive protection under Section 36.
(Paras 12–14)
PARTITION DEED — Unregistered — Validation by payment of stamp duty — Effect
Payment of deficit stamp duty and endorsement by Collector cures defect of stamp duty only.
Defect of non-registration under Section 17 of the Registration Act cannot be cured.
(Paras 5.1, 9–11)
CIVIL SUIT — Declaration of title — Nature of evidence
In a suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession, court must determine substantive rights.
Unregistered partition deed cannot be relied upon even for collateral purpose where such reliance directly affects title.
(Paras 19–20)
ADVERSE POSSESSION — Proof — Unregistered partition deed
Unregistered partition deed cannot be used even to establish adverse possession when such document is relied upon to prove source and nature of possession.
(Para 19)
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE — Bipin Shantilal Panchal principle — Applicability
Though Supreme Court suggested postponement of objections relating to admissibility till final stage, objection regarding inherent inadmissibility of compulsorily registrable unregistered document may be decided at any stage.
(Paras 8, 17–18)
RESULT
Order of trial Court de-exhibiting certified copy of unregistered partition deed upheld.
Civil Revision Petitions dismissed.
(Paras 20–21)
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGMENT
1. Core Issue
Whether the trial court committed an error in de-exhibiting Ex.B2, being a certified copy of an unregistered partition deed dated 22-06-1969, in suits filed for:
-
declaration of title, and
-
recovery of possession.
2. Petitioners’ Case
-
Partition deed was:
-
old (1969),
-
earlier marked in O.S. No.311 of 2009,
-
validated by Collector after payment of stamp duty.
-
-
No objection earlier when marked.
-
Defendants were in possession since 1969.
-
Document should be considered at final stage as per Bipin Shantilal Panchal.
3. Respondents’ Objection
-
Document is:
-
compulsorily registrable,
-
unregistered,
-
allegedly fabricated.
-
-
Non-registration defect cannot be cured.
-
Marking was subject to objection.
-
Application for de-exhibiting rightly allowed.
4. Legal Framework Considered
The Court exhaustively analysed:
-
Section 17, Registration Act
— compulsory registration. -
Section 49, Registration Act
— effect of non-registration. -
Proviso to Section 49
— collateral purpose. -
Order XIII Rule 4 CPC
-
Leading precedents including:
-
Bipin Shantilal Panchal
-
R.V.E. Venkatachala Gounder
-
K.B. Shah & Sons
-
Sure Ranga Murali Krishna Reddy
-
Lakkoji Mohana Rao
-
Dammu Eswara Rao
-
Budha Jagadeeshwara Rao
-
5. Findings of the Court
(a) On Registration
-
Partition deed clearly falls under Section 17(1)(b).
-
Non-registration renders it inadmissible for proving rights in immovable property.
(b) On Collateral Purpose
Court reiterated settled law:
-
Collateral purpose cannot include:
-
proof of partition,
-
allotment of shares,
-
transfer or extinguishment of rights.
-
Permissible collateral use is limited to:
-
severance of status only,
-
not ownership or title.
(c) On Certified Copy
-
Certified copy does not improve admissibility.
-
Section 36 Stamp Act protection applies only to original instruments.
(d) On Prior Marking in Earlier Suit
-
Admission of document in one suit does not bind another suit.
-
Objection can be raised afresh.
(e) On Adverse Possession
-
Defendants relied upon partition deed itself to explain possession.
-
Such use goes to root of title.
-
Hence cannot be treated as collateral purpose.
6. Final Conclusion
Because:
-
the suits are for declaration of title, not mere injunction,
-
substantial property rights are involved,
-
document is unregistered and compulsorily registrable,
the unregistered partition deed:
-
cannot be looked into even for collateral purpose, and
-
was rightly de-exhibited.
RATIO DECIDENDI
An unregistered partition deed, which is compulsorily registrable under Section 17 of the Registration Act, cannot be received in evidence to establish title, partition, allotment of shares or adverse possession; and even for collateral purpose, such document cannot be relied upon where its use directly affects substantive rights in immovable property. Mere marking of such document as an exhibit or validation by payment of stamp duty does not cure the defect of non-registration, and objection to its admissibility can be raised at any stage.
No comments:
Post a Comment