In Brief
The Supreme Court examined whether a 1994 memorandum recording a property partition effected by the deceased father in 1992 required compulsory registration. The Court held that despite being labeled a 'memorandum,' the document was a compulsorily registrable family settlement because it effected relinquishment of other legal heirs' rights. Being unstamped and unregistered, it was inadmissible for proving the partition itself. However, the Court partly allowed the appeal, permitting the document to be used for collateral purposes (establishing severance of status or possession) if the party paid stamp duty and penalty and got the document impounded."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.