PRITAM SINGH Vs. DARSHAN SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The controversy here is with regard to a document titled "Ikranama" being exhibited and tendered in evidence. The objection to its. admissibility as raised by the Defendant and upheld by the Court being that it was a partition deed and thus require registration. According to the Plaintiff on the other hand, it was a family settlement recording the terms what had already been agreed upon by the members of the family. The emphasis in this behalf being upon the fact that the parties to it were real brothers and sisters and in 1968 when it was drawn up other parents too were alive. Some land has, as per this document, come to their mother too.

(2.) It is well settled, as held in Tek Bahadur Bhujil v/s. Debi Singh Bhyujil and Ors. : AIR 1966 SC, 292. that a family settlement is generally prepared as a record of what had been agreed upon, in order that there are no Hazy notions about it in future and where it is a document which is no more than a memorandum of what had been agreed to between the parties, it does not require registration. Further, in Ram Charon Das. v/s. Girja Nandini Devi and Ors. : AIR 1966 SC, 323, it was held that Courts give effect to a family settlement upon the broad and general ground that its object is to settle existing or future disputes regarding property amongst members of a family and that in this context the word 'family' is not to be understood in a narrow sense of being a group of persons whom the law recognises as having a right of succession or having a claim to a share in the disputed property. The consideration for a family settlement is the expectation that such a settlement will result in establishing or ensuring amity and goodwill amongst the relations.

(3.) Turning now to the "Ikrarnama" itself, a reading of it leaves no manner of doubt that it recites and records what has already been decided upon between the parties and they being members of the family. Particular reference is here to be made to the recitals in it to the effect that possession of the shares has already been taken by the parties. This document thus clearly answers to the description of a family settlement and does apt, therefore, require registration.