1. This revision petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed being aggrieved by the order dated 01.03.2012 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Nandikotkur, in I.A. No. 12 of 2012 in O.S. No. 13 of 2002 whereby the application filed by the respondents/ defendants under Order XIII Rule 1(2) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity CPC) was partly allowed.

2. Originally, the suit is filed by the petitioners herein for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property and also for passing preliminary decree. During the course of trial, the respondents filed I.A. No. 12 of 2012 under Order XIII Rule 1(2) of CPC seeking to receive the documents viz. (1) Gift deed dated 24.12.1957; (2) Relinquishment deed dated 19.04.1982 and (3) Agreement dated 22.06.1998, in evidence.

3. The 4th respondent filed an affidavit in support of the above I.A. stating that the unregistered gift deed dated 24.12.1957 and so also the relinquishment deed dated 19.04.1982 do not require registration as per Mohammadan Law. One Ghouse Baig, the grand father of the 4th respondent herein, gifted the schedule land to his grand mother Kuburabee vide document dated 24.12.1957 and subsequently his grand mother i.e. Kuburabee executed a Will in favour of his father i.e. deceased 1st defendant. Further, the father of the 1st petitioner herein, who is the senior paternal uncle of the 4th respondent herein, also executed relinquishment deed dated 19.04.1982 in favour of the father of the 4th respondent herein by relinquishing all his rights over the schedule land, as he rendered services to their mother i.e. Kaburabee. Thereafter, petitioners 1 and 2 herein have also executed an agreement dated 22.06.1998 agreeing to give Ac.0.05 cents as they rendered services to their grand mother. Hence, these documents are necessary to mark as exhibits to prove their case.

4. The petitioners herein filed a counter affidavit before the Court below denying the allegations mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of the petition inter-alia contending that if a written gift deed recites the factum of prior gift, then such deed is not required to be registered but when the writing is contemporaneous with the making of the gift, then it must be registered under Section 17 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908. Hence the gift deed dated 24.12.1957 is not admissible in law, for want of registration and, therefore, sought for dismissal of I.A.

5. After perusing the documents, hearing the arguments on both sides and also relying on the dictum of the Honble Apex Court in Hafeeza Bibi and Others vs. Shaikh Farid (Dead) by LRs. and Others, 2011 (4) ALT 5 (SC), the Court below concluded that the gift deed dated 24.12.1957 was based on love and affection; moreover the property was delivered to the donee and donar accepted the gift; and as the gift deed is in the form of declaration by the donar and not as an instrument of gift deed, no registration is required. Likewise, the Court below also concluded that the agreement dated 22.06.1998 also does not require registration. However, in respect of relinquishment deed dated 19.04.1982, the Court below concluded that as the right or title is transferred under the said document from executant to executee, the said document requires registration. Thereby, the Court below allowed the petition in part, permitting the respondents herein to mark gift deed dated 24.12.1957 and agreement dated 22.06.1998 as exhibits and disallowed the claim insofar as marking of relinquishment deed dated 19.04.1982, as it requires registration.

6. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present revision is filed, on the premise that permitting the respondents to mark gift deed dated 24.12.1957 and agreement dated 22.06.1998 as exhibits is contrary to law, unjust and unsustainable and the Court below failed to consider the judgment of Apex Court in Hafeeza Bibi and Others (supra) in its proper perspective. The