Kerala High Court
Maggi Simon vs The District Registrar (General)/ ...
Author: A. Muhamed Mustaque
Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 8TH PHALGUNA, 1939
WP(C).No. 3399 of 2018
--------------------
PETITIONERS :
-----------
1 MAGGI SIMON, W/O. SIMON,
THEKKETH HOUSE, 43/1195, SITARAM QUARTERS,
OLARIKKARA, PULLAZHI P.O., THRISSUR - 680 012.
2 FEBY. S.THEKKATH,S/O. SIMON,
THEKKETH HOUSE, 43/1195, SITARAM QUARTERS,
OLARIKKARA, PULLAZHI P.O., THRISSUR - 680 012.
3 SEBY S. THEKKATH,S/O. SIMON,
THEKKETH HOUSE, 43/1195, SITARAM QUARTERS,
OLARIKKARA, PULLAZHI P.O., THRISSUR - 680 012.
BY ADV.SRI.T.R.RAVI
RESPONDENTS :
-----------
1. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR (GENERAL)/ COLLECTOR
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR (GENERAL), THRISSUR.
2. THE SUB REGISTRAR,
AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR.
R1 & R2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.S.GOPINATHAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 27-02-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
bp
12/3/2018
WP(C).No. 3399 of 2018 (Y)
--------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO. 415 OF 1990 OF SRO.
AYYANTHOLE.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF PARTITION DEED DATED 20.11.17.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 21.12.2017.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
bp
12/3/2018
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J
-------------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No. 3399 of 2018
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 27th day of February, 2018
JUDGMENT
The petitioners presented a partition deed for registration. The registration of the deed was objected stating that it can only be treated as a conveyance document. Accordingly it was ordered to be impounded. This order is under challenge.
2. The property originally belonged to Simon and Maggi, the husband and wife. Subsequently, Simon died. Thereafter, the property devolved upon his children also. The widow of Simon, Maggi being a co-owner along with the children who inherited share on the death of Simon, entered into a partition.
3. Taking note of the nature of the adjustment made in the deed, the Sub Registrar is of the opinion that this adjustment is not a partition and can only be treated as a conveyance.
4. The partition presupposes pre-existing rights available to the parties, who enter into such a deed. Whatever be the W.P.(C)No. 3399 of 2018 ..2..
nature of adjustment being made by them among themselves, it cannot be called as a conveyance. The Section 2(K) of the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959 defines partition are as follows.
b