The High Court at Kerala disposed of a writ petition wherein the petitioner challenged the refusal to register a settlement deed. The court held that validity of alleged oral partition is not for the Sub Registrar to decide and the appropriate remedy lies in the Civil Court.
This writ petition is disposed of in view of the interim order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/13TH KARTHIKA, 1936
WP(C).No. 8336 of 2010 (N) ---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
SUGUNAN, AGED 63, S/O.LATE VETHODY KUMARAN, HAVING PERMANENT RESIDENCE AT VETHODY HOUSE, EDAMUTTAM P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 568. AND PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 3C, CLEARWATERBAY APARTMENTS, 8KA, SHUE ROAD, KOWLOON, SAI KUNG, HONG KONG, REPRESENTED HEREIN BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER PRASANNAN, AGED 61, S/O.LATE VETHODY KUMARAN, RESIDING AT VETHODY HOUSE, EDAMUTTAM P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 568. BY ADV. SMT.JAYASREE MANOJ.
RESPONDENT(S):
-------------
1. THE SUB REGISTRAR, SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, KATTOOR, IRINJALAKKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MUHAMMED SHAFI M.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RVS.
WP(C).No. 28758 of 2014 (T)
APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS : ----------------------EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 08/12/2009. EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED DATED 19/01/2010. EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11/02/2010 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : ----------------------NIL. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE
RVS.
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
=========================
W.P(C).No.8336 of 2010 N
============================ Dated this the 04th day of November, 2014
JUDGMENT
In view of the interim order, nothing further survives in this writ petition. In the light of the statement filed by the first respondent as directed by this Court, it is on account of non furnishing of the details of all parties, registering authority refused to register the document initially. It is further submitted that instruments will be registered after rectifying the omissions. It is not a case of under valuation. It will be proceeded in accordance with law.
Accordingly in the light of the interim order, this writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE.
Sbna/05/11/14
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Sub Registrar can decide the validity of an alleged oral partition in a settlement deed
The scope of inquiry on registration of documents alleging oral partition
The remedy available to parties aggrieved by claims of oral partition
Sugunan
The Sub Registrar, Sub Registrar Office, Kattoor, Irinjalakuda, Thrissur District
The District Registrar Office of the District Registrar, Thrissur District
A.Muhamid Mustaque
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
