Registration exemption for decree on admission recognising family arrangement in immovable property upheld under the Registration Act

A decree passed on admission, recognising an existing family arrangement and relinquishment in immovable property, did not require registration under the Registration Act, 1908. Section 17(2)(vi) exempts decrees and orders of court relating only to the subject matter of the suit from compulsory registration, unless the compromise extends to property outside the suit or creates rights for the first time. As the decree merely acknowledged pre-existing rights rather than creating a new right in praesenti, it remained admissible in evidence to prove co-ownership and entitlement under the family arrangement.

---

---

Issues: Whether a decree passed on admission, recognising a pre-existing family arrangement and right in immovable property, required registration under the Registration Act, 1908, and whether the decree could be excluded from evidence for want of registration.

Analysis: The decree in the earlier suit was held to be a decree on admission and not a compromise decree creating rights for the first time. It recognised an already asserted and admitted relinquishment or family arrangement in favour of the plaintiff and his brother. On a plain reading of Section 17(2)(vi) of the Registration Act, 1908, decrees and orders of court relating only to the subject matter of the suit do not require registration, and the exception to compulsory registration under Section 17(1)(b) and (c) applies unless the compromise takes in property outside the suit. The decree did not fall within any category of instrument creating a new right in praesenti, and the judgment distinguished the earlier precedent relied on by the appellants because that case involved creation of rights for the first time.

Conclusion: The decree did not require registration and remained admissible to prove the plaintiff's co-ownership and entitlement based on the family arrangement.

---