Partition–Suit for–Dismissal of–Case of defendant that the guwadi came in his share in the oral partition in the year 1960 and, thereafter, in the year 1962, he obtained the permission for construction–Construction was raised by his own funds and Nagar Palika issued the patta in his favour–Father of parties accepted that he did not incur any amount in raising the construction–Plaintiff also accepted that he did not incur any expenses for the construction–Partition had taken place by the oral settlement between the parties–Thereafter, the written agreement was executed by the plaintiff–He failed to explain that how the bada came in his possession on which he had constructed his own house, and how he came in the possession of agricultural land–Document Ex. A-1 bears the nomenclature of the settlement deed and its contents show that it was a declaration made by the father of parties to settle the dispute between his sons–It does not create or extinguish any right of parties in the immovable property–Hence, it was not required essential registration u/s. 17–Further, the plaintiff cannot be allowed to take the advantage of filing of the revenue suit in view of the fact that he has not come with the case in the present suit that properties of the father situated at Sapotara and Gangapur City are joint and undivided between the parties–Held, suit was rightly dismissed.
