( 1 ) THE plaintiff in O. S. No. 171 of 2001 on the file of Principal Junior Civil judge, Sattenapalli is the revision petitioner. He filed the revision assailing the order dated 9. 3. 2007 passed in O. S. No. 171 of 2001 whereby and where under the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge upheld the objection of the defendant and refused to receive document dated 15. 6. 1982 in evidence.

( 2 ) FACTS of the case, in brief, giving rise to filing of this revision by the plaintiff in O. S. No. 171 of 2001 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, sattenapalli are: the plaintiff filed the suit for injunction simplicitor against the defendant in respect of the suit schedule property which comprises two items; item No. 1 admeasures Ac. 0. 55 cents and item No. 2 admeasures Ac. 0. 5. 5 cents. It is the case of the plaintiff that his mother gifted the suit schedule property in the year 1982 and put him in possession. He accepted the gift thereafter his mother executed a gift deed on 2. 5. 2001. The revenue authorities issued Pattedar pass Book in his favour. The defendant is no other than his sister. The defendant in order to grab the suit schedule property resorted to creating forged and fabricated document. Therefore, he filed the suit for injunction against the defendant. The defendant filed written statement disputing the gift deed set up by the plaintiff. It is the plea of the defendant that the plaintiff concocted the document to lay a claim over the suit property. The plaintiff is no other than her own brother and their parents have six issues. Their father mahaboob Saheb died about 15 years back. Their mother- Shaik Katum Bee resided in the house of the plaintiff and died on 2. 7. 2001. On 6. 8. 1984 the said Shaik katum Bee executed a registered gift deed in her favour in respect of Ac. 2. 30 cents of land and 5. 5 cents of house site. The defendant accepted the gift and thereupon the donor put her in possession of the gifted property. On 17. 11. 1988 the defendant executed the registered gift deed in favour of her mother and her younger brothers son viz. Shaik Shahjahan in respect of 0. 75 cents and delivered the possession to Shaik Katum Bee. The said Shaik Katum Bee has only life interest over the said 0. 85 cents. After her death the property has to devolve on Shaik Shahjahan with absolute rights. The registered gift deed dated 2. 5. 2001 set up by the plaintiff is collusive and invalid.

( 3 ) THE trial Court settled the issues. During the course of evidence on behalf of the plaintiff, he sought to file document-dated 15. 6. 1982 styled as gift deed. The defendant raised an objection for marking the document on the ground that it is inadmissible for want of proper stamp duty and registration. The learned Principal Junior Civil Judge upheld the objection of the defendant by an order-dated 9. 3. 2007. The said order is under challenge in this revision by the plaintiff.

( 4 ) THIS revision came to be admitted on 22. 6. 2007 and an order of interim stay also came to be granted on the said date. The respondent/defendant entered appearance and moved C. M. P. No. 4289 of 2007 with a prayer to vacate the interim order dated 22. 6. 2007 passed in C. M. P. No. 3155 of 2007. When the vacate stay petition came up for consideration, both the counsel consented for disposal of the main revision itself. Hence, heard learned counsel for the parties.

( 5 ) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the parties are muslims and the law governing the parties does not require the gift to be evidenced by a document and even if the gift is evidenced by a document, the same is not required to be registered. A further submission has been made that an unregistered gift deed can be received in evidence for collateral purpose under the proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908. In support of his submissions, reliance has been placed on the decisions of Supreme Court in mahboob SAHAB V. SYED ISMAIL, AIR 1995 SC 1205 and RAM

Click Here to Read the rest of this document