SIRIGIRI OBULESU Vs. DUGGINENI VENKATESDWASRLU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is preferred against the order, dtd. 18/3/2019, passed in O.S.No.84 of 2014 on the file of the Court of VII Additional District Judge, Gudur, Nellore District, not allowing the documents at Sl.Nos.1 to 22 in the chief affidavit for making in evidence, as per the docket orders, dtd. 30/10/2018.

(2.) The revision petitioner is the 7th defendant in the suit. The respondents 1 and 2 are the plaintiffs. The respondents 3 to 13 are the other defendants who are shown as not necessary parties to this revision. The suit is filed for declaration of title, recovery of possession and mandatory injunction. When the 7th defendant filed affidavit as DW1 intending to file (24) documents mentioned in the affidavit, objection was taken by the plaintiff on 30/10/2018 on the ground of want of registration and insufficiency of stamp duty on the agreements of sale as it is recited 'delivery of possession' was effected under those documents. On 30/10/2018, the trial Court recorded the objection and adjourned the case to 5/11/2018, stating that it was of the view that it was proper to pass orders regarding admissibility of the documents while marking the documents and hence posted for appearance of DW1 on 5/11/2018. The docket order of the trial Court, dtd. 30/10/2018, reads as follows:

(3.) Being aggrieved by the order of rejection to receive the documents in evidence, the present revision was filed stating that refusal to receive the documents mentioned at Sl. Nos. 1 to 20 in the affidavit is contrary to law and they can be marked for collateral purpose and that the trial Court erred in not taking into consideration the judgment relied on by the petitioner. It is further stated that these documents can be received in evidence for collateral purpose as they relate to the period prior to 2012 and they do not require registration.