K MANJUNATH Vs. BASAVARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition coming on for preliminary hearing in ?B? group is considered for final disposal, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

(3.) This Court while referring to several decisions of the Apex Court, has concluded that though Section 49 of the Registration Act prohibits receiving documents in evidence, requiring registration under Section 17, which are compulsorily registrable, it was observed that the proviso to the said Section provides for receiving such documents in the circumstances narrated therein. Therefore, it was clear that there is no total prohibition for receiving unregistered documents in evidence and that it was settled law that an unregistered partition deed could be received in evidence to prove any collateral transaction. Therefore, it was held that even if an unregistered document is marked, it would in no way affect the interest of the parties. Mere marking of documents does not take away the right of the opposite party to contend that such a document cannot be relied upon as it is not registered. Similarly, when the law declares that for a collateral purpose, an unregistered document could be looked into, it makes it clear that such a document could be marked under those circumstances. The proper course for the Courts would be to mark such documents, subject to objections, permitting the parties to adduce evidence instead of putting questions to the Counsel at the time of arguments, etc.