KALIAPPAN Vs. KUZHANDHAIVELU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the first defendant in O.S. No. 418 of 1999 on the file of the Sub Court, Namakkal. It is a suit for partition filed by the respondent. Both the parties are brothers. When the defendant comes forward with a document captioned as <IMG>JUDGEMENT_427_MADLJ3_2011Image1.jpg</IMG> the plaintiff raised strong objection to mark the document stating that by virtue of the said document, the division purported to take place and hence it would attract Section 2(15) of the Indian Stamp Act and Section 17(1)(b) of the Indian Registration Act as well. It is contended by the petitioner that it is a mere agreement to divide the properties between the parties in a future date which agreement came to existence in the presence of panchayatras and since it does not create any right by itself, there is no impediment to mark the document and to admit the same in evidence.

(2.) THE learned Sub Judge, after hearing both sides, passed an elaborate order rejecting the contention of the petitioner and observed that the documents produced by the defendant is not admissible in evidence and posted the case for further evidence of defendant.

(3.) HOWEVER, both the parties agreed to get the agreement registered within three months. When both the recitals in the document are carefully scrutinized, the necessary corollary would be that by virtue of the document, they divided the properties and they also fixed specific portions to be taken by each of them and the other portion indicates that there is an agreement to get the registered document executed within three months and to divide the expenses for registering the document equally. In my considered opinion, the rights of the parties are created by this document in the properties divided in praesenti.