This petition is by the second to fifth defendants in

O.S.No.56/2015 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge

and JMFC, Soraba (for short, 'the civil Court'). The

petitioners have impugned the civil Court's order dated

04.11.2022, and the civil Court by this order has

refused to admit the unregistered document called

'Kararu Pathra' dated 22.01.2010.

3

2.

The civil Court, after extracting the material

particulars of this document, has opined that there is a

partition inter se the respondent and the petitioners'

mother, the deceased first defendant [Smt.Huchamma].

As such, the said Kararu Pathra dated 22.01.2010

should be registered under the provisions of Section 17

of the Indian Registration Act, 1908 (for short, 'the

Registration Act') and because it is not registered, it can

not be admitted in evidence even for the purposes of the

provisions of Section 49(1)(c) of the Registration Act.

3.

It transpires from the records that while the

respondent contends that she is only the daughter of

Sri.Kalviru Dyavappa @ Dyavanna S/o. Puttappa @

Puttanna and his wife, Late Nagamma, the petitioners

contend that because the couple did not have children

for a number of years, they took Smt.Huchamma, thier

mother, in adoption. They also contend that Late

4

Kalviru Dyavappa @ Dyavanna has executed his last

Will and Testament dated 16.02.1984 bequeathing

immovable properties inter se the respondent and their

mother, Smt. Huchamma, but one of the properties was

not partitioned. As such, the respondent and Smt.

Huchamma have executed the subject Kararu Pathra.

4.

In the light of the rival proceedings, the civil

Court has framed different Issues including the Issues

such as whether the respondent proves that she is the

absolute owner of the properties and whether the

petitioners prove the due execution and attestation of

the last Will and Testament dated 16.02.1984 and the

due execution of the Kararu Pathra.

5.

Sri S.Rajendra, the learned counsel for the

peittioners relying upon the aforesaid circumstances,

submits that even if the Kararu Pathra is construed as a

partition deed because there is division of one of the

subject properites by metes and bounds inter se the

5

respondent and the first defendant [Smt. Huchamma], it

would nevertheless be admissible in evidence for

collateral purposes so long as appropriate stamp duty is

paid or even if it is not paid, necessary measures have

to be taken as contemplated in law. He submits that in

view of the recital in the Kararu Pathra, the petitioners

can also rely upon it to demonstrate that the

respondent has acknowledged the bequeath under the

aforesaid last Will and Testament and also severance of

the joint family status inter se the respondent and the

first defendant, Smt. Huchamma.

6.

On perusal of the impugned order, it is

obvious that the civil Court has not considered whether

the subject Kararu Pathra can be looked into for

collateral purposes as now contended, and this Court is

of the considered view that this petition must be

disposed of with liberty to the petitoners to reagitate the

question of admisibility for collateral purposes calling

6

upon

the

civil

Court

to

reconsider

the

same

nowithstanding the impugned order. Hence, the

following:

ORDER

[a]

The petition is disposed of permitting

the petitioners to request the civil Court to

consider permitting production of the Kararu

Pathra dated 22.01.2010 in evidence for

collateral purposes on payment of due stamp

duty and with appropriate opportunity to the

respondent.

[b]

The civil Court shall consider such

request independent of the reasons assigned

in the impugned order.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SA/-

Ct:sr