C. V. N. SASTRY, J.

( 1 ) HEARD the learned Counsel on both sides.

( 2 ) THE question raised in this CRP relates to the admissibility of the document dated 13-7-1992 produced by the petitioners/ defendants in the suit. The suit is filed by the respondent for partition of the plaint schedule property into two equal shares and to allot one such share to the plaintiff. The defence is that the plaintiff-respondent himself executed a document dated 13-7-1992 styled as will deed wherein he allotted certain properties to the defendants with immediate rights and also provided that the remaining family properties shall go to them after his life-time. When the defendant sought to tender the said document in evidence, the plaintiff raised an objection with regard to its admissibility. By the impugned order the lower Court upheld the objection raised by the plaintiff and held that the said document is inadmissible in evidence for want of registration. It further held that the document in question cannot be admitted even for the collateral purpose of proving the nature and character of possession of defendants as the main purpose of tendering the document in evidence is to show the terms of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document