( 1 ) THIS appeal challenges, inter alia, the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge on an application for clarification pursuant to an order passed by the Registry, inter alia, calling upon the appellant to get the property valued for payment of stamp duty under article 45 of the Stamp Act.

( 2 ) AFTER the communication of the said order of the Registry, the appellant filed an application before the learned Single Judge for striking down the order of the registry as no stamp duty was to be paid by the appellant. To appreciate the contention of the parties, it is relevant to reproduce the contents of the order passed by the learned Single Judge in the suit for injunction filed by the plaintiff being cs (OS) No. 2027/1996, which are as under :

IN view of the settlement, as recorded, the suit is decreed in terms of memorandum of Family Settlement, Ex. C-3. Ex. C-3 shall form part of the decree. It is clarified that the mere factum of the suit being decreed in terms of Ex. C-3, shall not tantamount to either the waiver or discharge from liability for payment of any statutory levies, municipal taxes or stamp duty.

( 3 ) IT seems that in view of the later part of the said order/decree the registry had given notice that market price of the property be valued and stamp papers be filed accordingly. The learned Single Judge, in the application for clarification, took the view that Ex. C-3 was not a family settlement but it was a partition deed and therefore, provisions of Section 2 (15) of STAMP ACT, 1899 were applicable and the decree passed in the suit was in the nature of a decree for partition and duty as levied in the said provisions of the Indian STAMP ACT, 1899 was leviable.

( 4 ) MR. Nigam, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, has contended that a family settlement was arrived at between the parties during the course of the suit pending since 1996 as the parties in the suit were close relatives. The appellant mahip Singh Thakur was son of Sh. Manmohan Singh Thakur; whereas the respondent Ms. Hema Thakur was the widow of Sh. Kuldeep Singh Thakur who was brother of Sh. Manmohan Singh Thakur and other respondents were the sons and daughters of late Sh. Kuldeep Singh. Therefore, it was contended before us that in order to achieve peace in the family and in order to put an end to the litigation with the help of common relatives and family friends a settlement was arrived at between the parties to the suit pursuant to an oral family settlement in February 2002 and thereafter, the same was filed in the court on 5th day of February, 2003. The relevant paragraphs of the said family settlement are as follow:

AND WHEREAS on the intervention of common relatives and family friends, and with a view to not only save the honour of the family but also to preserve the peace and security of the family by avoiding litigation, and to bring an amicable end to all the disputes and differences which have arisen and which might arise between the Parties, the Parties arrived at the following full and final oral Family Settlement in february 2002, in order to effect distribution through mutual adjustment of their already existing rights and interest in the above mentioned properties for exclusive possession, ownership and better use, occupation and enjoyment, in the manner hereinafter described

1. The Delhi property, which was owned jointly by the First Party and the fifth Party in the shares mentioned above, would now be owned absolutely and exclusively by the First Party. The Fifth Party shall have no right whatsoever in the delhi property and shall therefore not claim any right, title or interest and shall not challenge or contest the same before any forum, court or any authority.

2. The Nahan property, which was owned jointly by the First Party and the fifth Party in equal shares, would now be owned absolutely and exclusively by the fifth Party. The First, Second, Third or Fourth Party shall have no right whatsoever i