RANCHI, India, July 22 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on June 23:

1. This appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and decree dated 26.02.2019 (decree signed on 06.03.2019) passed by learned District Judge I, Jamtara dismissing Civil Appeal No.14 of 2017 and confirming the judgement and decree dated 31.03.2017 (decree signed on 11.04.2017) passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) I, Jamtara in Title Suit No.9 of 2009. The appellant was the defendant no.1 in Title Suit No.9 of 2009.

2. This appeal has been admitted for hearing on the following substantial questions of law:

i. Whether exhibit -4 was effecting partition and compulsorily registrable as per section 17 and 49 of the Registration Act or it was just a memorandum of earlier partition?

ii. Whether Oral Family Settlement (Exhibit-4) entered into between the sons with respect to the property acquired by their father during his lifetime without making daughters as party to the said deed is binding upon the parties and whether the finding of the learned appellate court is perverse and against the mandate of law?

3. Case of the plaintiff

I. The plaintiff Sukhdeo Mandal filed the suit for declaration of right, title and interest over the suit properties in his favour and against the defendant and prayed for delivery of possession over the suit properties in his favour through the process of the court and permanent injunction against the defendants restraining them from disturbing his possession.

II. The land involved in the present case has been described in the schedule to the plaint as under: -

"In the district of Jamtara, Subdivision Jamtara, Police Station Jamtara, Out Post-Karmatarn, Anchal Jamtara, in mouza Karmatarn No. II appertaining to A.K.J. No. 106/4115, plot No. 1206/A area 1/2 decimal and plot No. 1206/2305/A area 1/2 decimal total measuring an area of 1 decimal of land alongwith one pucca constructed house shown in red colour in the annexed trace map."

III. As per the plaint, Narsingh Poddar, Son of Late Raghu Poddar purchased 2 decimals of land from plot No. 1206 and 1206/2305 of mauza Karmatanr from the descendants of Khartar Shaw and Ramdhani Shaw by registered deed of sale; Narsingh Poddar entered into possession of the property in the year 1997 and constructed house over the property having transferrable basauri rights. The genealogy has been given in paragraph 4 of the plaint. Narsingh Poddar had two sons, namely, Moti Poddar and Shyam Poddar. The proforma defendants were the descendants/legal heirs of Moti Poddar.

IV. It is the case of the plaintiff that Narsingh Poddar died in the year 1999 and Moti Poddar died in the year 1987 and thus he left behind only one son, namely, Shyam Poddar. The wife of Moti Poddar is Thakuri Devi who was defendant No. 2. It was the case of the plaintiff that after death of Narsingh Poddar, both the brothers or their legal heirs had succeeded the property purchased by Narsingh Poddar. It was his further case that after death of Moti Poddar, Shyam Poddar had started creating disturbance and ultimately the aforesaid two decimals property was amicably divided half and half; northern one decimal of land was allotted to Shyam Poddar whereas Southern one decimal of land was allotted to the heirs of Moti Poddar. To this, a memorandum of partition was created for future reference on 20.11.2005 only.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=%2FE3WiyNUWFIaR1oBGE62Wn1OGxL7f1qjwuclMJhCjDm%2BExtXErYNAuwPQggQTHBM&caseno=SA/157/2019&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010163122019&state_code=7&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.