Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 53348
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA ON THE 3rd OF JANUARY, 2024 MISC. PETITION No. 6040 of 2023 BETWEEN:- SANTOSH KUMAR SONI S/O LATE TRILOK SONI, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION: FARMER R/O VILLAGE MANKEDI TEHSIL SAHPURA DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH) .....PETITIONER (BY SHRI DHANESH KANT TIWARI - ADVOCATE) AND 1. VIJAY KUMAR SONI S/O LATE SURAJ SONI, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE MANKEDI TEHSIL SAHPURA DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH) 2. SWATANTRA KUMAR SONI S/O LATE SURAJ SONI, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE MANKHEDI TEHSIL SAHPURA DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH) 3. NEERAJ SONI S/O LATE RAJENDRA KUMAR SONI, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE MANKHEDI TEHSIL SAHPURA DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH) 4. SMT. DEVKA BAI W/O LATE RAJENDRA KUMAR SONI, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE MANKHEDI TEHSIL SAHPURA DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH) 5. DAYARAM SONI S/O LATE TRILOK SONI, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE MANKHEDI TEHSIL SAHPURA DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH) 6. THE STATE OF M.P. THROUGH THE COLLECTOR DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH) .....RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI AKHILESH SINGH - ADVOCATE) This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
Dhanesh Kant Tiwari,
ORDER
This Petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India has been filed against order dated 15.09.2023 passed by First Civil Judge, Junior Division Patan, District Jabalpur in Civil Suit No.RCSA/54/2017 by which Panch Faisla has been held to be an acknowledgment of partition and it was also decided that the same does not require registration.
2. By referring to Panch Faisla, it is submitted by counsel for petitioner that by no stretch of imagination it can be said that it was an acknowledgment of partition. In fact the opening words of said Panch Faisla are that in order to resolve the dispute, which is going on between the parties, it was decided that one set of property will go to one party and another set of property will go another party. Thus, it was a deed of partition requiring registration under Section 17 of Registration Act.
3. Per contra, petition is vehemently opposed by counsel for respondents. It is submitted that Panch Faisla was an acknowledgment of partition and it was not a partition deed.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
5. The Panch Faisla has been placed on record. The opening words of this Panch Faisla are that in view of long pending dispute between the parties and in order to resolve the dispute, which is pending before the Court, it was decided by Panchas to partition the property and accordingly, it was directed that one set of property will go to one party and another set of property will go to another party.
6. From the plain reading of this Panch Faisla, it is clear that partition was done on the day when Panch Faisla was given and prior to that Panch Faisla, there was no partition between both the parties. Therefore, by no stretch of imagination, it can be said that Panch Faisla relied upon by respondents was an acknowledgment of partition or was a family settlement deed and not a partition deed.
7. Under these circumstances, this Court is of considered opinion that Panch Faisla was required to be registered as per the provisions of Section 17 of Registration Act. Since, it was an unregistered document, therefore, the same could not have been admitted in evidence.
8. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of considered opinion that trial Court committed a material illegality by treating Panch Faisla as an acknowledgment of partition.
9. Accordingly, order dated 15.09.2023 passed by First Civil Judge, Junior Division Patan, District Jabalpur in Civil Suit No.RCSA/54/2017 is hereby set aside. 10. Petition succeeds and is hereby allowed. (G.S. AHLUWALIA) JUDGE SR*
