PUJALA SIVA PRASAD Vs. MANDYAM HARINADHA REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed challenging the order, dtd. 17/2/2020, allowing I.A.No.317 of 2019 in O.S.No.197 of 2015 on the file of the Court of IV Additional District Judge, Tirupati, filed under Order XIII Rules 3 & 4 and Sec. 151 CPC to de-exhibit exhibit A1, acknowledgment letter, dtd. 10/7/2014.

(2.) Heard Sri S.Varada Rajulu Chetty, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner/plaintiff and Sri T.D.Phani Kumar, learned counsel representing Sri Harinath Reddy Soma, learned counsel for the respondent/defendant.

(3.) The case of the defendant, in brief, is that the plaintiff brought the suit for a sum of Rs.15,00,000.00 on the basis of an unregistered mortgage deed, dtd. 10/7/2014 which the defendant never executed and is not admissible in evidence for any purpose for want of registration, since it is not a letter of acknowledgment, but only a mortgage deed, as the amount was said to be paid towards a debt and security is created over the immovable property in respect of the said debt. The plaintiff has filed chief examination affidavit on 16/7/2019 and the matter was posted to 2/8/2019 for cross-examination. The matter was thereafter entrusted to a junior counsel. Taking advantage of their absence, the plaintiff misguided the Court and got marked exhibit A1, which is not admissible as per law. The document has been inadvertently admitted by the trial Court as exhibit A1. Thus, the document was not properly admitted in evidence. Hence, the present petition was filed for de-exhibiting the document, that is, alleged acknowledgment letter, dtd. 10/7/2014.