Documents evidencing past family arrangements need not be stamped or registered, while their classification impacts admissibility based on the nature of rights created.

ORDER :

R. SAKTHIVEL, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved by the Fair and Decretal Order dated January 24, 2019 passed by 'the learned Subordinate Judge, Ariyalur’ ['Trial Court' for convenience] in I.A. No.650 of 2018 in O.S. No.43 of 2014, the Petitioners therein have preferred this Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950.

2. The Petitioners herein are the Plaintiffs and the Respondents 1 to 19 herein are the Defendants in the Original Suit in O.S. No.43 of 2014 on the file of the Trial Court.

3. During pendency of this Civil Revision Petition, the first respondent / first defendant – Narayanasamy passed away and Respondents 20 to 22 are brought on record as Legal Representatives of the deceased - Narayanasamy vide Order of this Court dated March 21, 2024 made in C.M.P. Nos.24462, 24466 and 24467 of 2024 in C.R.P. No.2167 of 2019.

4. For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties will be referred to as per their array in the Original Suit. For better appreciation of facts, the admitted relationship between the parties has been shown in the following genealogy:

5. The Plaintiffs filed an Original Suit for declaration of tile, delivery of possession and mesne profits. The suit properties consist of 12 items, out of which Suit Item No.9 is situate at Ayan Thathanur and Vangaram Village and other properties are situate at Anganur Village. The case of the Plaintiffs is that the Suit Properties, and some other properties not the subject matter of the Suit, originally belonged to the family of Venkatachalam and Kaliyamoorthy. In an oral family arrangement, that took place between the brothers, which was subsequently reduced into writing on May 31, 1948, the Suit Properties were allotted to the share of Kaliyamoorthy. As per the oral family arrangement, Kaliyamoorthy was in enjoyment of the Suit Properties till his demise on June 15, 1972. After his demise, his only daughter - Pichai Ammal was in possession and enjoyment of the Suit Properties. Pichai Ammal left the Suit Village and began to live at Kozhiyur. In her absence, the defendants 1 and 2 were looking after the share of Kaliyamoorthy at Anganur Village on behalf of Pichai Ammal. Pichai Ammal used to visit the village every now and then to supervise the agricultural operations. This was in vogue till her demise on June 28, 2008.

5.1. The plaintiffs 1 and 2 and one Vasugi are the children of Pichai Ammal. Vasugi passed away leaving behind defendants 11 and 12 as her legal heirs. Since the first plaintiff was employed at Hosur, he was unable to concentrate on the agricultural operations and hence, the defendants 1 and 2 continued to look after the Suit Properties and were in management of the same on behalf of the first plaintiff. They used to deduct the expenses and gave proceeds either in cash or in kind as and when the situation demanded. Since Vasugi’s legal heirs do not want to join as plaintiffs, they have been arrayed as defendants.

5.2. In the year 2013, the first plaintiff came to know that the name of the defendants were entered in the revenue records without the knowledge and consent of the plaintiffs. Since the defendants are not allowing the plaintiffs to enter into the Suit Properties, after issuing legal notice, the plaintiffs have filed the Original Suit for declaration of title, delivery of possession and mesne profits.

6. The second defendant filed written statement a