GAJANAN SESHAPPA HEGDE Vs. VENKATRAMAN SHESHAPPA HEGDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision under Section 115 of the CPC arises from the order dated 2-7-1993 passed by learned Civil Judge, Sirsi, on LA. VII taking the view that the document is not admissible in evidence in view of section 49 of the Registration Act. Trial Court opined that the document is not registered and Section 49 prevents from its being admitted. The court opined that no doubt partition may be oral, but if it is reduced in the form of a document effecting the division of properties and contains terms of bargain, it requires to be registered and once it was not registered, it was inadmissible. But it also held that it may be used for collateral purpose. Feeling aggrieved by that order, the defendants have come up before this Court under Section 115.

(2.) A preliminary objection has been raised as to the maintainability of the revision on behalf of the respondents by Sri R. V. Jayaprakash. Learned Counsel contended that the order in question does not amount to a case decided. It may only amount to an order passed in process of progress of the case. He further submitted that in view of Section 105 even if there is any error in the order of the Munsiff, it was always open to him to take that plea in appeal.

(3.) THESE contentions of the learned Counsel for the respondents have been controverted by contending that this Court has taken a view that such order is revisable under Section 115 by the learned Single Judge. Learned Counsel referred to a case of Raghunath Bhandary v seetharama Punja.