Family property disputes are among the most common and emotionally charged issues in India. These conflicts typically arise when joint family properties are passed down or during partitions, often leading to disagreements over ownership, possession, and distribution. The lack of clear terms regarding property division exacerbates these disputes, particularly when family members have differing recollections of informal agreements made over the years.
At the core of many family property disputes is the fundamental question of whether a clear agreement was made to divide the property and if such an agreement exists, whether it holds legal weight. These arrangements can manifest in different forms, ranging from informal oral agreements between family members to more structured written arrangements, or even formal deeds of partition.
Oral family agreements are common in India, especially in rural areas, where trust and verbal understanding often govern property matters. However, these agreements, lacking formal documentation, can be difficult to enforce in court. Written agreements, on the other hand, help clarify intentions and offer legal protection. These can range from simple notes to more detailed memorandums, recording the family's mutual understanding of property division.
The legal treatment of family arrangements whether oral or written raises a recurring challenge: does the validity of such agreements hinge on registration? Under the Registration Act, 1908, certain documents affecting immovable property must be registered to be enforceable. Yet, family settlements often blur this line. This article examines the intersection of family settlements and statutory registration, drawing on judicial interpretation to explore how courts navigate questions of validity, enforceability, and fairness in resolving family property disputes.
Family Settlements: Oral Agreements vs. Written Agreements
Family arrangements are a traditional and widely-used method in India to resolve intra-family property disputes. These settlements are often based more on trust than on formal procedures, with the primary goal being to preserve family harmony and avoid litigation. Oral family agreements, although common, are legally recognized. The Supreme Court in Kale v. Director of Consolidation1 held that a family settlement need not be in writing and may be valid even without registration, provided it is voluntary and intended to resolve disputes or preserve peace within the family.
The court in Kale's judgement referred the case of Tek Bahadur Bhujil v. Debi Singh Bhujil,2 where the Court distinguished between documents that create rights and those that merely record what has already been orally settled. The Court observed that a family arrangement can be oral, and a written memorandum prepared only as a record of an earlier oral agreement does not require registration. It is only when the document itself is the instrument of partition or title that registration becomes mandatory.
Similarly, in S. Shanmugam Pillai v. K. Shanmugam Pillai,3 the Court reiterated that if a family arrangement is arrived at in the interest of maintaining peace and settling disputes amicably, courts will be reluctant to disturb such settlements. Judicial preference has long tilted in favour of upholding such arrangements when bona fide and fair. The Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Ram Gopal v. Tulshi Ram4 took the same view: even if an oral settlement is later referenced in a court petition for the sake of record, that alone does not attract the requirement of registration.
However, while oral arrangements are legally permissible, their evidentiary value in litigation is often questioned. Without supporting documents or conduct indicating mutual understanding, proving the existence or terms of an oral settlement can be challenging. Written agreements, by contrast, offer greater clarity and evidentiary weight. Yet, when a document purports not merely to record but to effectuate a division of immovable property, it must comply with the requirements of the Registration Act, 1908. Failure to do so can render it inadmissible for proving property rights, even if the underlying arrangement was valid. Thus, whether oral or written, the enforceability of a family settlement turns not only on its form but also on its purpose and how courts interpret its legal effect.
Registration: When Does the Law Step In?
The requirement for registration arises when a document purports to create, declare, assign, limit, or extinguish rights in immovable property valued at one hundred rupees or more, as stipulated under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908.5 If such a document is not registered, Section 49 of the Act renders it inadmissible in evidence for proving the transaction it records.6
The Supreme Court in Subraya M.N. v. Vittala M.N.7 clarified this position while examining a written family settlement. It held that binding family arrangements dealing with immovable property can be made orally and, when so made, do not attract the requirement of registration. However, when the terms of the settlement are reduced into writing with the intention that the document should serve as evidence of the arrangement, registration becomes necessary.
In that case, the Court found that although the written panchayat resolution contained language suggesting relinquishment of rights in property, it could still be used as corroborative evidence. The evidence can be used to explain the conduct of the parties, since the actual family arrangement had already been acted upon. The subsequent actions of the parties, such as separate residence, independent property purchases, and applications for land grants, reflected that the settlement had been accepted and implemented, despite the absence of registration.
Thus, while oral family arrangements remain valid, written documents require registration if they are intended to serve as instruments creating or evidencing rights in property. The law steps in when formality is used not just to record the past, but to define the future.
Admissibility of Unregistered Family Settlement Documents
The evidentiary value of unregistered documents in family property disputes often arises when parties rely on informal writings to support an oral settlement. Courts have clarified that while unregistered documents cannot be used to prove a transaction that affects rights in immovable property, they may still be admissible for collateral purposes.
In Korukonda Chalapathi Rao v. Korukonda Annapurna,8 the Supreme Court applied the principles laid down in Kale Case and reiterated that registration is not required when a document merely records a past family arrangement and does not itself create or extinguish rights. The Court held that if a writing simply reflects what was already settled orally, it does not fall within the ambit of Section 17(1)(b) of the Registration Act. However, such documents cannot be used as primary evidence of the transaction; they may only be admitted to explain the arrangement already acted upon by the parties.
Similarly, in K. Arumuga Velaiah v. P.R. Ramasamy,9 the Court examined whether a panchayat award reflecting a family partition required registration. It concluded that the award was not a document effecting transfer of title but rather a memorandum outlining future steps for division. Since it did not by itself create any present interest in specific immovable properties, it was held to fall under the exception under Section 17(2)(v) of the Registration Act and therefore did not require registration. The Court further clarified that such a document could still be admitted in evidence to demonstrate the conduct of the parties or support estoppel, provided it was not used as a source of title.
Thus, courts distinguish between documents that are the instrument of transfer and those that merely record or reflect what was already settled or intended. While the former requires registration to be admissible, the latter may still play a supporting role in litigation, especially in explaining the nature of possession or the factual backdrop of a family arrangement.
Conclusion
The legal approach to family settlements and their registration has evolved to balance statutory requirements with the practical realities of familial property arrangements. Indian courts have consistently upheld the legal validity of oral family settlements, while also recognising the evidentiary value of such arrangements when they are later recorded in writing but remain unregistered.
The distinction drawn between documents that merely record past arrangements and those that operate as instruments creating or extinguishing rights remains the deciding factor. Where a document serves only to reflect an earlier oral settlement, registration is not required. However, when a document itself constitutes the source of rights in immovable property, its enforceability depends on compliance with the mandatory provisions of the Registration Act.
Unregistered documents may still be admitted for limited purposes, such as explaining the conduct of the parties or establishing the factum of prior arrangements. This judicial approach ensures that equity is preserved, especially in cases where arrangements have been acted upon and no injustice is caused.
While registration offers legal certainty and strengthens evidentiary value, courts have, in appropriate cases, acknowledged and upheld the legitimacy of genuine family arrangements. Effect has been given to such settlements despite the absence of registration, where the intention of the parties and their subsequent conduct affirm the existence and implementation of the arrangement. The settled legal position thus respects both statutory compliance and the underlying intent to maintain family peace and resolve disputes amicably.
BY
Vijay Pal Dalmia, Advocate
Supreme Court of India & Delhi High Court
Email id: vpdalmia@vaishlaw.com
Mobile No.: +91 9810081079
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/vpdalmia/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/vpdalmia
X (Twitter): @vpdalmia
Footnotes
1 (1976) 3 SCC 119.
2 AIR 1966 SC 292.
3 (1973) 2 SCC 312.
4 AIR 1928 All 641.
5 The Registration Act, No. 16 of 1908, § 17, India Code (1908).
6 The Registration Act, No. 16 of 1908, § 49, India Code (1908).
7 (2016) 8 SCC 705.
8 (2022) 15 SCC 475.
9 (2022) 3 SCC 757.
© 2025, Vaish Associates Advocates,
All rights reserved
Advocates, 1st & 11th Floors, Mohan Dev Building 13, Tolstoy
Marg New Delhi-110001 (India).
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist professional advice should be sought about your specific circumstances. The views expressed in this article are solely of the authors of this article.
