RASBIHARI Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,SAWAI MADHOPUR, RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admissibility of a document dt.23/09/1972, styled as family settlement, is the core issue to be addressed in the instant writ petition.

(2.) Brief facts leading to filing of this writ petition are that the plaintiffs-respondents instituted a suit for declaration and cancellation of a registered sale deed dt.11/08/2004 and mutation No.1216 dt.20/08/2004 in favour of Bitthaldas and consequential injunction. It was the claim of the plaintiffs-respondents that the suit property was ancestral in nature and hence their predecessor Ballabhdas, arrayed as defendant No.1 in the suit, had no right to execute the release deed dt.11/08/2004 in favour of Vitthaldas, defendant NO.3 in the suit.

(3.) The defendants-respondents, after their appearance in the suit, presented their written statements refuting the allegations of the plaint and raising many contentions which need not be dilated here as they are not germane to resolve the controversy here which revolves around a document dt.23/09/1972. The plaintiffs-respondents claimed that this document was a partition deed and for want of stamp and registration was inadmissible in evidence. According to the plaintiffs-respondents, from the language of this document, it clearly emerged that it was not a recordance of a past event but partition was effected through the document itself and hence as per the provisions of the Stamps Act and Registration Law, the document ought not only to be liable to be properly stamped but registered as well and as the document fell short of both these mandatory requirements, it was inadmissible for all purposes.