Manjeet Kaur And Anr. vs Amarjeet Kaur And Ors. on 2 May, 2005
12. A plain reading of the above clause along with the entire terms
of settlement clearly spell out that no rights have been created in the
immovable properties as the immovable properties are not to be
partitioned by metes and bounds. The parties have settled different
shares of amount which would be received by them on the sale of the
immovable properties. Thus, what the parties will ultimately
Poonam Arora Vs. Kamal Mohan Soni Ex.336/2011 Page 6 of 9
7
received would be movable property i.e. the cash value of their
respective defines shares realized on the sale of both the properties.
As such, the settlement read as a whole and in a meaningful manner
does not create and correspondingly does not extinguish any rights in
the suit properties. What is to be done is that the parties have to share
the sale proceeds in various proportions. The case law cited by ld.
counsel for DH i.e. Manjeet Kaur & Anr. Vs. Amarjeet Kaur &
Ors. 2005(83) DRJ 475 squarely applies in the facts and
circumstances of the case. Hence, I do not subscribe to the arguments
of ld. counsel for Objector that the decree was compulsorily
registrable.