This Civil Revision Petition is filed aggrieved by the order-dated 20.3.2009 passed in Memo in G.R.No. 4292 of 2008 in O.S.No. 19 of 2001 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Narsipatnam.

2. Petitioners herein are the plaintiffs and respondents herein are the defendants in the Suit.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the plaint schedule land is a part of land situated in S.No. 426/3 of Chettupalli Village and originally belonged to Gudepu People. The husband of first plaintiff and father of 2nd plaintiff by name Akkireddi Appalanaidu purchased the said land under two different sale deeds dated 14.2.1952 and dated 2.4.1959 from Gudepu Somulu and another. It is stated that the father of 2nd plaintiff Appalanadi had been in continuous possession and enjoyment of plaint schedule land since the dates of purchase and subsequent to him the plaintiffs have been in possession and enjoyment of the same. It is also stated that the land situated to the West of plaint schedule land belonged to the father of the defendants. On 24.6.1973 the second defendant being the manager of the family of the defendants provided a cart track admeasuring 50 yards x 3 yards in their land for the plaintiffs to reach local fund road by receiving consideration of Rs. 350/- and also executed an agreement on the same day itself in evidence to the above said transaction in the presence of the then Sarpanch, Vice President and other elders of the village. The cart track provided for plaintiffs into the lands of defendants is shown as ABCD in plaint rough plan. The plaintiffs used to enjoy their easementary right of way peacefully, continuously without any interference from any body. Subsequently, the defendants partitioned their properties including the land situated on the West of Plaint schedule property. During that partition, the Western part of that land as well as the Eastern strip fell to the share of the second defendant and the Eastern part fell to the share of defendant No. 1 whereas both the defendants got their cattle sheds, makham and kallam sheds in their respective parts of their land and the plaint plan marked ABCD way runs by the side of those sheds of the defendants. It is stated that last year the defendants exchanged their lands and during that exchange the Eastern strip of the above said land was given to first defendant and thus the first defendant became the owner for the entire Eastern portion of land that situates to the West of Plaint schedule land. The Easementary right of way imposed under the agreement dated 26.4.1973 in and over the land of the defendants shall be there always along with the servant heritage to whom so ever it may be transferred and the right of plaintiffs can not be questioned either by the defendants or by any body. When the first defendant obstructed the plaintiffs while they were taking their cart with load of sugar cane through plaint plan ABCD way, plaintiffs filed O.S.No. 19 of 2001 with the following prayer:

"(i) Declaring that the plaintiffs are having easementary right in and over plaint plan marked ABCD cart track and consequently granting permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, restraining them, their men and servants from interfering with the plaintiffs' peaceful possession and enjoyment of their easementary of way in and over plaint plan marked ABCD cart track in any manner whatsoever.

(ii) Granting costs of the suit;

(iii) Granting such other reliefs as the Hon'ble Court deemed fit under the circumstances of the suit."

4. Be that as it may, first defendant-first respondent herein filed a Memo in G.R. 4292/2008 in O.S No. 19 of 2001, requesting the Court below to reject Ex. A3, which is an unregistered agreement. The Court below rejected Ex. A3 relying on the judgment of this Court reported in T. BASAVARAJU (DIED) PER LRS AND OTHERS VS. T. NAGARATNAM AND OTHERS1, holding that it was an inadmissible document, under Order XIII Rule 3