NINGARAJU Vs. SUBRAMANYAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE court below has rejected I.A. 12 filed by the defendant under Section 151 of CPC praying permission to mark the unregistered sale deeds dated 2.5.1983 and 30.7.1992.

(2.) THE plaintiff also claims to be the owner in possession of the suit schedule property under registered sale deed The defendant also claims to be the owner in possession of the suit schedule property under different unregistered sale deeds. The unregistered sale deed of the plaintiff is marked as Ex. P.1 without paying any stamp duty as well as penalty, on the ground that the same is taken on record only for collateral purpose i.e., in order to show possession.

(3.) LEARNED advocate for the respondent however submits that the unregistered sale deed produced by the petitioner is unsigned document and the signatures are forged. The reliability of the document will have to be gone into by the trial Court after recording the evidence. But the initial question to be decided is as to, 'whether the unregistered sale deed can be looked into or admissible as evidence for collateral transaction or not. Therefore, the said question has to be reconsidered by the trial Court in the light of the aforesaid judgment and other judgments on that point.