Unregistered family settlement deed without payment did not bar partition, as co-owners retained their rights in joint property.

An unregistered family settlement deed, not signed by all co-sharers, could not defeat a partition suit where the stipulated payment to the other co-sharers was never made. The document was treated as one intended to operate only upon future payment, but the evidence and uncontroverted pleadings showed non-payment. In those circumstances, the arrangement did not effect a complete partition by metes and bounds, and the co-owners did not effectively relinquish their rights in the joint property. Even assuming compulsory registration was not required, the deed did not acquire full operative effect and could not bar the partition claim.

---

---

Issues: Whether the family settlement deed, though unregistered and not signed by all co-sharers, could defeat the suit for partition when the stipulated payment to the other co-sharers had not been made.

Analysis: The deed was treated as one intended to operate in future upon payment of the stated amount, but the evidence showed that the payment had not been made. The relevant pleadings were not specifically denied, and the court had also recorded a finding that the amount was not paid. In those circumstances, the alleged family settlement did not bring about a complete partition by metes and bounds, and the co-owners had not effectively relinquished their rights in the joint property. Even on the assumption that the document did not require compulsory registration, it did not acquire full effect so as to bar the suit.

Conclusion: The suit for partition was rightly decreed and the appeal failed.

---