Andhra High Court High Court

R. Viswanathan Setty vs T. Lakshminarasamma And Others on 17 July, 2000

Andhra High Court
R. Viswanathan Setty vs T. Lakshminarasamma And Others on 17 July, 2000
Equivalent citations: 2000 (5) ALD 270, 2000 (5) ALT 165
Bench: V Rao


ORDER

1. Heard the Counsel on either side.

2. This civil revision petition is directed against the order of the Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri, dated 24-12-1999 passed in OS No.45 of 1995, under which a document sought to be admitted into evidence on behalf of the plaintiff was rejected as inadmissible for want of registration of the said document.

3. The facts relevant for the purpose of this petition are that the petitioner herein, who is the plaintiff in the suit, along with another entered into agreement to purchase some immovable property from the defendant No.1 (respondent No.1). Thereafter, the agreement in respect of sale was abandoned, and the plaintiff filed the present suit for recovery of money said to have been given as advance under the agreement to purchase the property.

4. The objected document purports to relinquish the rights of one of the parties to the document in favour of the plaintiff. The learned Senior Judge proceeded on the assumption that the document in question is a release deed purporting to create rights in the immovable property, and as such is inadmissible in evidence.

5. It is pertinent to note that what has been relinquished under the document in question is the right arising out of an agreement to purchase the property. This would mean that the right relinquished is a right to obtain title under regular sale deed under the agreement of purchase. The document in question in itself docs not purport to create any right in the property, which is the subject matter of agreement between the plaintiff and defendant No.1.

6. Thus, there can be no manner of doubt that the document, the admission of which was objected to, does not purport to create any rights in immovable properties in itself. In view of this, the order of the learned Civil Judge refusing to admit the document on the ground that it is unregistered, obviously, is erroneous.

7. Accordingly, the CRP is allowed at the stage of admission by setting aside the impugned order, and it is directed that the document shall be admitted in accordance with law.