SMT. KASTUREVVA v. SRI. HUVAPPA

1. SMT. KASTUREVVA W/O. SHIVAPUTRAPPA CHAVADI @ HADIMANI, AGE. 61 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. IBRAHIMAPUR, TQ. NAVALGUND, AND DIST. DHARWAD.

2. SMT. SUNANDA W/O. HANUMAPPA DEVAKKI AGE. 37 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. JAGAPUR, TQ. NARGUND AND DIST. GADAG.

3. SMT. RATNAVA W/O. SHIVAKUMAR HANCHINALA AGE. 34 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. NIRALAGI, TQ AND DIST. GADAG. …PETITIONERS GIRIJA A BYAHATTI GIRIJA A BYAHATTI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench (BY SRI. S.C.JAINAR, ADVOCATE) AND:

SRI. HUVAPPA S/O. NINGAPPA CHAVADI AGE. 24 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. IBRAHIMAPUR, TQ. NAVALGUND AND DIST. DHARWAD-582208.

SMT. NILAVVA W/O. NINGAPPA CHAVADI AGE. 49 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. IBRAHIMAPUR, TQ. NAVALGUND AND DIST. DHARWAD-582208.

VIJAYA W/O. BASAPPA MADALAGERI AGE. 28 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O BEHIND RAM TEMPLE, RAMNAGAR, ASUNDI, TQ AND DIST. GADAG-591126. …RESPONDENTS - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2674 WP No. 104918 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 03.12.2022 IN O.S.NO.355/2017 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NAVALGUND, VIDE ANNEXURE-C IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)

1. Notice to respondents is dispensed with in view of the proposed order to be passed.

2. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari quashing the Order dated 03.12.2022 in O.S.No.355/2017 passed by the Civil Judge and JMFC, Navalgund, vide ANNEXURE-C in the interest of justice and equity and etc. b) Pass any other order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case including award of cost, in the interest of justice and equity.

3. Respondent No.1 had filed a suit in O.S.No.355/2017 seeking for partition and separate possession. In the said matter, the petitioners, who are defendants No. 1 to 3, have sought for the production of two - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2674 WP No. 104918 of 2024 relinquishment dated 16/03/2006 18/05/2006 and mark the same in their evidence. The said request came to be rejected by an order dated

03.12.2022, by holding that the relinquishment deeds, not being registered, are inadmissible in evidence, as they are compulsory registrable documents under Section 17(1)(b) of the Registration Act, 1908. It is challenging the same, the petitioners are before this Court.

Once earlier, when the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner was called upon to produce a copy of the relinquishment deed to ascertain whether it had been registered or not. A memo dated 07.02.2025 has been filed enclosing the photocopies of the relinquishment deeds. A perusal of the same, indicated that the said documents are not registered.

In view of the matter, a relinquishment deed transferring rights immovable property - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2674 WP No. 104918 of 2024 compulsorily registrable under Section 17(1)(b) of the Registration Act, 1908, the same have not having been registered, those documents cannot be marked in evidence, as they are inadmissible. However, liberty is reserved for the petitioners to prove the said relinquishment deeds acted upon by any other means.