CHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AUTHORITY Vs. JAGADAMBAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS case is referred under Section 57 (1) of the Indian Stamp Act by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Board of Revenue, Madras. The first respondent Jagadambal is the first wife of Srinivasa Reddiar. The second respondent Chinmayananda Reddiar is the sister's son of Srinivasa Reddiar. Srinivasa Reddiar executed a will on 2 -10 -1941, bequeathing the properties mentioned in the Will to the first respondent - first wife and stating that she should administer them and pay the debts incurred by him by selling the properties and that out of what remained after liquidating the debts, the properties should be enjoyed by the second respondent after the death of the first respondent. Srinivasa Reddiar died, and there were disputes as to their rights under the Will.

(2.) IT was contended on behalf of the Revenue that by this document the second respondent became entitled to B Schedule properties immediately and thereby acquired more rights than otherwise given to him under time Will. According to the Revenue, this amounted only to a settlement. That it cannot be a settlement is very clear. 'Settlement' is defined under section 2 (24) of the Stamp Act as a non -testamentary disposition in writing of moveable or immovable property made (a) in consideration of marriage; (b) for the purpose of distributing property of the settlor among his family or those for whom he desires to provide, or for the purpose of providing for some person dependent on him, or (c) for any religious or charitable purpose. It is obvious, that the document was not executed for any of the purposes mentioned in Section 2 (24) of the Act, and, therefore, cannot be a settlement. The question is whether it is an instrument of partition as defined under Section 2 (15) as meaning any instrument whereby co -owners of any property divide or agree to divide such property in severalty.