B RAJENDRAN Vs. K ARUMUGHAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE fifth defendant in O.S. No. 36 of 2008, on the file of the Subordinate Court, Rasipuram, is the revision petitioner herein. THE suit was filed by the respondents for declaration that 'A' Schedule Property belongs to the plaintiffs and for delivery of possession of the suit 'A' Schedule property by the defendants and for injunction. THE fifth defendant viz., the revision petitioner filed I.A. No. 371 of 2009, to receive the document dated 15.2.1996, entered into between the first plaintiff and the first defendant and that petition was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, this revision petition is filed.

(2.) IT is submitted by Ms. P.T. Asha, the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner that the Court below without properly appreciating the contents of the document dated 15.2.1996, erroneously come to the conclusion that there was transfer of interest, in presents under the document. Therefore, the said document is hit by Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908 (here in after referred to as the 'said Act') and on that ground, held the document cannot be received in evidence. According to the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner, there was a Panchayat held on 3.7.1995 and in that Panchayat, the properties were divided between the parties and that was recorded and the document dated 15.2.1996 was marked as Exhibit B-1. Therefore, under the disputed document, past transaction was recorded and there was no transfer of interest in praesenti and without reading the core of the document, the Court below has taken some sentences in the document and arrived at a conclusion that under the document, transfer was effected. Hence, the document cannot be received in evidence.

(3.) THEREFORE, non testamentary instruments, which purport or create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish, whether in present or in future, any right or title or interest, shall be compulsorily registered.