DOKALA VEERAMMA Vs. DOKALA RAMAYAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision Petition is filed against the Orders passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur in Memo bearing SR.No. 3871 of 1999 in O.S.No. 144 of 1996, dated 9-7-1999.

(2.) Petitioners are the Plaintiffs. They filed a suit for declaration of title and perpetual injunction in O.S.No. 144 of 1996. During the course of evidence, petitioners filed three documents namely registered partition deed dated 1-9-1957, endorsement dated 30-9-1976 on the said partition deed and another list of partitioned items dated 28-8-1978. The receipt of those documents were objected by the other side. But, however, two documents were allowed. The third document viz., endorsement dated 30-9-1976 on the partition deed dt. 1-9-1957 was not received in evidence on the ground that it is a compulsory registrable document and it was rejected for want of stamp duty and registration. The said Order of the lower court is assailed in this Civil Revision Petition.

(3.) The learned counsel Mr.V.S.RAnjaneyulu for the petitioners/Plaintiffs strenuously contends that the Order passed by the lower court is illegal and contrary to the catena of decisions of the Supreme Court and the High Courts on this subject. He submits that it is only a family arrangement made in pursuance of the earlier division and therefore, it is not compulsorily registrable document. He relies on the decisions reported in Venku Bai v. Raju Bai (alias) Rajeswaramma, MT. Girja Bai v. Sadashiv Dhundiraj, Full Bench decision of Jammu & Kashmir High Court reported in Bharilal v. Behari Lal and Narender Kumar v. Hans Raj.