High Court Orders Property Partition: Unregistered Relinquishment Deed Declared Inadmissible

A significant High Court judgment has granted a decree for property partition, highlighting the inadmissibility of an unregistered relinquishment deed. The case, spanning over two decades, involved a sibling dispute over inherited agricultural land.

Case Background

The appeal, originating from a protracted civil suit (filed in 1991), concerned a dispute between a brother and sister (the respondent and appellant, respectively) over the inheritance of their father's agricultural land in Wardha , Maharashtra. The lower courts had dismissed the sister's suit for partition, leading to the present second appeal. The case was marked by the respondent's failure to appear and present a crucial relinquishment deed.

The Contention

The appellant (sister) argued that her brother (respondent) had fraudulently obtained her signature on a relinquishment deed in 1990, under the pretext of a partition agreement. Crucially, the respondent failed to produce this deed in court. The appellant maintained her right to a one-half share in the property, citing her name's inclusion in land records and the lack of a valid relinquishment document.

The respondent, in his written statement, claimed the property was his father's self-acquired asset, negating the appellant's claim to inheritance. He further argued that a prior will gave him sole ownership. However, neither the will nor a registered relinquishment deed was presented as evidence.

Legal Arguments and Precedents

The appellant's counsel relied on the precedent set in Yellapu Uma Maheswari and another Vs. Buddha Jagadheeswararao and others , (2015) 16 SCC 787, arguing that the nature of a document, not its label, determines its validity. The court highlighted that under Section 17(1)(b) of the Registration Act, a relinquishment of immovable property requires registration; an unregistered document is inadmissible as evidence.

The court noted the respondent's failure to produce the unregistered relinquishment deed, stating that the lower courts' findings concerning it were "perverse." The court addressed concerns around a sale deed executed in favor of the appellant after her father's death, rejecting the lower court’s inference that the brother helped her in purchase, and consequently, it didn’t entitle her to partition. The judgment emphasized that such assumptions were insufficient grounds to deny the partition claim.

The High Court's Decision

The High Court overturned the lower courts' judgments, allowing the appeal. The court declared the appellant's right to a half-share in the property and ordered that she be put in separate possession. A further inquiry was directed under Order 20 Rule 12 of the Civil Procedure Code to assess mesne profits (losses due to dispossession) from the time the suit was filed until possession was transferred. The decree for partition will be sent to the Collector under Section 54 of the Civil Procedure Code.

This decision underscores the importance of proper documentation and registration in property disputes, emphasizing that the absence of a registered document, coupled with a failure to provide substantive evidence to the contrary, cannot invalidate established inheritance rights. The lengthy duration of this case highlights the need for efficient resolution of property disputes to prevent protracted legal battles.