Madras High Court
J.Gunasekaran vs Sarala on 27 July, 2021
CRP.PD.No.2655 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 27.07.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
CRP.PD.No.2655 of 2018 and
CMP.No.15836 of 2018
1.J.Gunasekaran
2.J.Pannerselvam
3.J.Gopi ..Petitioners
Vs.
1.Sarala
2.Ammu
3.R.Sangeetha
4.A.Kavitha
5.Meera ..Respondents
PRAYER:
The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India to set aside the fair and decretal order dated
28.07.2017 passed in IA.No.1230 of 2015 in OS.No.346 of 2011 on
the file of the Additional District Munsif, Poonamallee
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Prabakar
For Respondents
For R1 to 4 : Mr.M.V.Seshachari
R5 : No appearance
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.PD.No.2655 of 2018
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the fair and decretal
order dated 28.07.2017 passed in IA.No.1230 of 2015 in OS.No.346 of
2011 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Poonamallee, thereby
dismissing the petition seeking to permit the petitioners to impound
the document for payment of stamp duty with penalty.
2. The petitioners are the defendants 1, 2 and 4. The
respondents 1 to 4 are the plaintiffs, and they filed suit for partition.
While pending the suit, the petitioners filed petition to permit them to
file coor chit. They have not paid any proper stamp duty and it is
unregistered one. Therefore, they filed petition to impound the same
for payment of stamp duty with penalty. The same was dismissed on
the ground that under the said document, the parties are divided the
property from the date of the said coor chit, i.e. 10.03.1999.
Therefore, the document requires stamp duty as well as registration,
and it cannot be admissible for want for registration.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the
judgment in the case of Yellapu Uma Maheswari & Another Vs.
Buddha Jagadheeswararao and others reported in 2016 (2) LW
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.PD.No.2655 of 2018
656, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held as follows:
18. Then the next question that falls for consideration
is whether these can be used for any collateral purpose. The
larger Bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court in Chinnappa
Reddy Gari Muthyala Reddy Vs. Chinnappa Reddy Gari
Vankat Reddy , AIR 1969 A.P. (242) has held that the whole
process of partition contemplates three phases i.e. severancy
of status, division of joint property by metes and bounds and
nature of possession of various shares. In a suit for
partition, an unregistered document can be relied upon for
collateral purpose i.e. severancy of title, nature of
possession of various shares but not for the primary purpose
i.e. division of joint properties by metes and bounds. An
unstamped instrument is not admissible in evidence even for
collateral purpose, until the same is impounded. Hence, if
the appellants/defendants want to mark these documents for
collateral purpose it is open for them to pay the stamp duty
together with penalty and get the document impounded and
the Trial Court is at liberty to mark Exhibits B-21 and B- 22
for collateral purpose subject to proof and relevance.
Accordingly, the document which was sought to be impounded can be
relied on for collateral purpose, i.e. severancy of title and nature of
possession of their respective shares, but not for the primary purpose
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.PD.No.2655 of 2018
i.e. division of joint properties by metes and bounds.
4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents would
submit that even in the written statement, they categorically stated
that the family arrangement was happened between the defendants
and one, J.Krishnan who is none other than the father of the
respondents herein. One coor chit was executed between them. As per
the said coot chit, he received a sum of Rs.20,000/- as his share in
respect of the suit property from the petitioners and thereafter they
divided the suit property and constructed the house as per their
respective shares. Therefore, the document which is sought to be
relied upon, in which already division of property was made and they
have constructed in their respective shares. Therefore, it cannot be
even relied upon for collateral purpose. In support of his contention,
he relied upon the order passed by this Court in CRP.(MD)No.855 of
2012 on 12.09.2019, wherein it is held that the unregistered
document is inherently inadmissible, it can be objected even at the
later point and failure to object to its admission, when it was marked,
would not make it automatically admissible. Further held that the
document which is compulsorily registrable under the Registration Act
cannot be admitted in evidence unless it is registered. He also relied
upon the unreported judgment of this Court in CRP.(PD)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.PD.No.2655 of 2018
(MD).No.673 of 2012 on 19.09.2019, wherein this Court held that a
family arrangement which is unstamped and unregistered cannot be
looked into even for collateral purpose. There is complete bar under
Section 35 of Stamp Act and it has become inadmissible in evidence.
5. Heard, Mr.R.Prabakar, the learned counsel for the petitioners,
and Mr.M.V.Seshachari, the learned counsel for the respondent 1 to 4.
6. Admittedly, the respondents 1 to 4 filed suit for partition and
the petitioners filed written statement and stated that family
arrangement was happened between the petitioners and the father of
the respondents by the coor chit dated 10.03.1999 and as per the said
coor chit, the father of the respondents received a sum of Rs.20,000/-
as his share in respect of the suit property and they have constructed
in their respective shares as per the coor chit. As held by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India, in a suit for partition, an unregistered
document can be relied upon for collateral purpose i.e. severancy of
title and nature of possession of various shares, but not for the
primary purpose i.e. division of joint properties by metes and bounds.
Accordingly, the coor chit dated 10.03.1999 can be relied upon for
collateral purpose i.e. severancy of title and nature of possession of
their respective shares alone. It cannot be relied upon for the purpose
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.PD.No.2655 of 2018
of division of their joint properties by metes and bounds. Unstamped
instrument is not admissible in evidence even for collateral purpose
until the same is impounded.
7. Therefore, the unregistered coor chit dated 10.03.1999 is
hereby impounded for payment of stamp duty together with penalty.
Thereafter, the trial court is directed to mark the same for collateral
purpose as mentioned above alone subject to proof and relevance.
8. Accordingly, the order dated 28.07.2017 passed in
IA.No.1230 of 2015 in OS.No.346 of 2011 on the file of the Additional
District Munsif, Poonamallee is set aside and this civil revision petition
is allowed with above limited purpose. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petition is closed. No order as to costs.
27.07.2021
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
lok
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.PD.No.2655 of 2018
To
The Additional District Munsif,
Poonamallee
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.PD.No.2655 of 2018
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.
lok
CRP.PD.No.2655 of 2018
27.07.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
