Full Text
CS(OS)2 187/1 993 AMBIKA VlJ ..... Plaint
Through Mr. B. Krishnan, Advocat Applicant in JA 9464/2009.
15.09.2009 IA No.946412009 The leamed counsel for the applicant has referred to the j
Division Bench of this Court in Nitill Jain r'. Anuj Jain 200 in which this Court has slated that "it is legally permissibl oral family settlement di viding/partitioning the properties record a memorandum in writing whereby the existing join sake of posterity record that the property has been alread div ided. The memorandum does not by itself partition th only records for information what has already been done b
The memorandum itself does not create or extinguish any rig oral partition in wri ting is created", 2009:DHC:5694
ORDER
2. After referring to case Jaw, the Division Bel1ch in Nit;n Jai has held " il foll ows that a decree of partition is an instrume and therefore is required to be stamped under Schedule I of Section 2( 15) of the Stamp Act. However, an oral family settl or partitioning the property is not required to be stamped memorandum recordi ng an oral family settlement which has place is not an instrument dividing or agreeing to divide p therefore not required to be stamped". ), [n view of the law as explained by the Di vision Bench, it a decision in Shahabia Begum v, P"khra; Begum AIR 19 which did not involve the drawing up of a decree of parlilion memorandum o f oral settlement reduced to writing, will n Registry is di rected to draw up the decree without insisting stamp duty under Article 45 of the Stamp Act.
4. Applic"tion stands disposed of
S. MURA
SEPTEMBER 15, 2009 ak