KOUSALYA AMMAL Vs. VALLIAMMAI AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above Revision Petition has been preferred against the order of the District Munsif, Cuddalore refusing to admit the unregistered lease executed by the respondents in favour of the petitioner as a documentary evidence. The petitioner sought to rely on the document to prove his character of possession which was collateral purpose to the terms of the lease deed. According to the petitioner, he was not relying on the document for proof of any terms in the document itself.

(2.) The District Munsif rejected the said application on the ground that the document is an unregistered one and therefore a document which is not registered under the provisions of S. 49 of the Registration Act could not be admitted as additional document.

(3.) I have heard Mr. Kannan and Mrs. Hema Sampath for the respective parties. According to Mr. Kannan the document of unregistered lease deed is not totally inadmissible and that it is admissible for proof of collateral purpose. Referring to S. 49 of the Registration Act, he submitted that the said section does not bar reception of an unregistered document in evidence. Mr. Kannan in support of his contention cited the following decisions :(1) AIR 1968 Pat 302 at 305 (FB)(2) AIR 1973 Mad 262(3) AIR 1977 Ker 196 (sic)(4) AIR 1978 Kant 143.Arguing contra the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the document which is required to be registered is not admissible in evidence at all and that since the unregistered deed has been set forth in the plaint and made out as the basis for claiming tenancy, the document is sought to be relied on for the main purpose itself. The learned counsel also contended that the relief of injunction itself is not maintainable through Civil Court. The learned counsel for the respondent cited the following decisions :(1) Yasodammal v. Janakiammal, (1968) 1 MLJ 249 : (AIR 1968 Mad 294)(2) Ranganathan v. Venkatesan, (1995) 1 MLJ 159 : (AIR 1995 Mad 146)(3) Krishnamurthy v. Sokab Products Private Limited, (1996) 1 MLJ 218 : (1996 AIHC 5368).