Oral partition of joint family property is permissible and subsequent writing does not require registration or stamp duty : Hindu Law.

The appellants were heirs of the original plaintiff Sonabai.
Sonabai’s husband Ganpatrao died leaving behind his son Motiram and two
daughters, namely, the appellants. Defendnat No. 1 was the widow of Motiram
while defendant no. 2 was daughter of defendant no. 1.

It was alleged that the suit property was the joint family
property left behind by Ganpatrao. The appellant submitted that there was no
partition of the suit property and as such they claimed one half share in the
suit property.

The defendant resisted the claim on the ground that soon
after the death of Motiram and his son, there was a partition and that the
appellants and defendants were cultivating and enjoying their separate share.

The learned Trial Judge held that there was already a
partition and the property did not continue to be joint. The learned Judge found
that the partition had taken place orally and subsequently in writing by
way of memorandum. The appeal was also dismissed.

In the instant case, it was not disputed that the suit
property was a joint family property. Where a document in respect of partition
comes into existence after the oral partition has already taken place, it will
neither require stamp nor registration. The partition deed would require
registration and stamp duty only if interest is created in specific property by
or under that document. If there is an oral partition, that oral partition
itself creates interest in that specific property and not the document which
comes into existence later. The document can be used for proving the severance
of status.