(1.) THE petition arises out of the order passed by the learned trial Judge in Special Civil Suit No. 3/1998 below Exh. 396 on 1st December, 2011 by which the learned trial Judge has allowed the objection of the respondents, has impounded the document dated 13th May, 1992 as per the provisions of Section 33 of the Bombay Stamp Act and has sent the document to the Collector for necessary action as per the provisions of Section 37 of the Bombay Stamp Act. The petitioners have also challenged the conclusions of the leaned trial Judge that the document dated 13th May, 1992 was required to be registered as contemplated by the provisions of Section 17(1)(b) of the Registration Act and as the document is not registered, it is inadmissible in evidence as per the provisions of Section 49(c) of the Registration Act.
(2.) THE respondents 1 and 2 have filed the civil suit against the petitioners and the respondents 3 to 5 praying for the decree for partition by metes and bounds in respect of 1/7th share of respondents 1 and 2 in the suit property. The respondents 1 and 2, in the alternative have prayed for the decree for declaration that they and the original defendants 2 to 5 (collectively), 6(a) to 6(d) (collectively), 7 (a) to 7(c) (collectively) and defendant No. 8 have equal shares in the suit property excluding the original defendant No. 1. By amendment to the plaint, the respondents 1 and 2 have made an alternative prayer seeking decree for declaration that the partition of 1969 between the deceased Mahadevrao and respondent No. 1 in respect of field Survey No. 84 of Kandli, Tq. Achalpur is unequal and is required to be reopened and had sought declaration that respondents 1 and 2 have 1/7th share in the field.
(3.) SHRI M.G. Bhangde the learned senior advocate assisted by Shri V.V. Bhangde learned advocate for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are not challenging that part of the order by which the document dated 13th May, 1992 is impounded and sent to the Collector for necessary action.