PALLAKKAN SAJINA Vs. SUB REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayers in the above Writ Petition (Civil) are as follows:

(2.) Heard Sri.V.T.Madhavan Unni, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Govt. Pleader appearing for the respondents.

(3.) According to the petitioner, Exts.P-5 and P-6 deeds would satisfy the definition of "instrument of partition", as understood in Sec.2(k) of the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959 and that therefore, the 1st respondent is legally obliged to register the same as deed of partition, and the stamp duty and registration fee payable will be only by reckoning it as a case, as envisaged under clause (ii) of Art.42 of the Schedule appended to the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959. It is pointed out that though the executants of Exts.P-5 and P-6 deeds will not fulfill the definition of "family" as understood of Sec. 2(fb) of the Kerala Stamp Act as well as clause (i) of Art.42 of the Schedule, the case in hand would certainly fulfill the definition of "instrument of partition" as aforestated and is chargeable for stamp duty as envisaged in clause (ii) of Art.42, etc.