Civil Revision Petition NO.3210 of 2008 is filed by the petitioner in I.A.No.737 of 2007 who was the defendant in O.S.No.17 of 2004 on the file of the Court of the Principal District Judge, Nellore. The suit was filed by the respondent herein, for specific performance of an unregistered agreement of sale. During the pendency of the suit, I.A.No.737 of 2007 was filed by the petitioner herein, requesting the Court to frame preliminary issue regarding the maintainability of the suit on the basis of an unregistered agreement of sale, in view of Section 17 (1) of the Registration Act.

2. Civil Revision Petition NO.3211 of 2008 is filed by the petitioner in I.A.No.81 of 2008 who was the defendant in O.S.No.61 of 2006 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Nellore being aggrieved by the order of the lower Court in not framing the preliminary issue regarding the maintainability of the suit in view of Section 17 (1) of the Registration Act. The suit was filed by the respondent herein, for specific performance of an unregistered agreement of sale. During the pendency of the suit, I.A.No.81 of 2008 was filed under Order 14 Rule 2 read with Section 151 CPC by the present petitioner, seeking to frame the preliminary issue regarding the maintainability of the suit in view of Section 17 (1) of the Registration Act, and to decide the same at the first instance.

3. The respondent herein resisted both the applications. The trial Court has dismissed both the applications on the ground that there are no merits in those petitions. Being aggrieved by the same, the defendants preferred these revision petitions. Since the issue involved in both the matters is one and the same, they are clubbed and this common order is passed.

4. The contention of the revision petitioner is that the suit was filed by the plaintiff for specific performance of an unregistered agreement of sale, therefore, without registration of the said agreement of sale, it cannot be enforced and hence, the suits cannot be maintained. He further submitted that in view of Section 17 (1) of the Registration Act, the agreement of sale is compulsorily registrable and as the suit agreements are not registered documents, the suits are not maintainable under law.

5. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act exempted registration of agreement of sale, on the basis of which, suits for specific performance are filed, therefore, they are maintainable under law.

6. Section 49 of the Act reads as follows:-

"Effect of non-registration of documents required to be registered:- No document required by Section 17 or by any provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 to be registered shall,-

(a) affect any immovable property comprised therein, or

(b) confer any power to adopt: or

(c) be received as evidence of any transaction affecting such property or conferring such power,

unless it has been registered:

Provided that an unregistered document affecting immovable property and required by this Act, or the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 to be registered may be received as evidence of a contract in a suit for specific performance under Chapter II of the Specific Relief Act, 1877, or as evidence of any collateral transaction not required to be effected by registered instrument."

7. After going through the said Section, it is very clear from the proviso that the unregistered document can be received as evidence of a contract in a suit for specific performance under Chapter II of the Specific Relief Act 1877 or as an evidence of any collateral transaction not required to be affected by registered instrument.

I?

8. Section 17 of the Registration Act describes the documents, which are compulsorily registrable.

9. Section 17 (1) of the Act reads as follows:-

"Documents of which registration is compulsory:- (1) The following documents shall be registered, if the property to which they relate is situate in a district in which and if they have been execu