Unstamped and unregistered documents can be admissible for collateral purposes, such as determining the nature of possession of the property, as established in Bondar Singh v. Nihal Singh, 2003 (4) SCC 161.

1. The revision petitioners are the defendants in the suit before the trial Court.

2. The respondent/plaintiff filed the suit for permanent injunction on the basis of his possession of the suit property in the capacity as transferee of the leasehold right in respect of the suit land from the husband of the first petitioner herein, who was the lessee of the same originally. The respondent sought the permission of the trial Court for reception of the unstamped and unregistered transfer deed of the leasehold right in respect of the suit property for the collateral purpose of proving his possession of the same.

3. The revision petitioners herein resisted the application for reception of the said document as evidence and filed a counter statement before the trial Court. Having heard the arguments advanced on either side, the learned District Munsif permitted the respondent to mark the document for collateral purpose in proving his possession. Hence, the revision.

4. Heard Mr. S. Sundaragopal, learned counsel for the revision petitioners and Mr. P. Valliappan, learned counsel for the respondent.

5. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners has argued at the outset that the document sought to be marked in evidence on the side of the respondent is in fact an unstamped and unregistered transfer deed relating to leasehold right in the immovable property of value more than Rs.100 and hence he has urged that in view of Section 17 (1)(b) of the Registration Act, 1908, the document is inadmissible for any purpose, as the same has not been registered in accordance with the provisions under the said Act, as it has to be compulsorily registered. In support of such contention, he has relied on the decisions rendered by the Division Benches of this Court, A.C. Lakshmipathy v. A.M. Chakrapani Reddiar and others, 2001 (1) LW 257 and R. Deivanai Ammal and another v. G. Meenakshi Ammal and others, 2005 (1) LW 343.

6. In answer to such contention put forth on the side of the revision petitioners, Mr. P. Valliappan, learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently argued that even though the document in question is compulsorily registrable, the same is admissible for the collateral purpose of proving possession of the suit property. He has relied on the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in Bondar Singh v. Nihal Singh , 2003 (4) SCC 161, for the proposition that unstamped and unregistered sale deed itself was permitted to be marked in evidence for collateral purpose, despite stringent provision under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908. The ratio laid down therein is extracted as under:

“Legal position is clear that a document like the sale deed in the present case, even though not admissible in evidence, can be looked into for collateral purposes. In the present case, the collateral purpose to be seen is the nature of possession of the plaintiffs over the suit land.”

7. Relying on the said proposition of law, learned counsel for the respondent would urge that in this case also, the document sought to be marked in evidence can be looked into for collateral purpose of the nature of possession of the suit land by the respondent. Hence, it is urged that the ratio laid down in the decision relied on by the revision petitioners cannot be made applicable to the fact of this case.

8. In this context, it is necessary to point out that in the case involved in A.C. Lakshmipathy v. A.M. Chakrapani Reddiar and others, 2001 (1) LW 257, unregistered document of family arrangement was sought to be marked in evidence to prove the title and therefore it was held therein that the same is not admissible in evidence. Similarly, in the case dealt with in R. Deivanai Ammal and another v. G. Meenakshi Ammal and others, 2005 (1) LW 343, also, the document under question was held to be family arrangement reduced into writing and it purported to create, declare/extinguish right, title or interest of the properties of one of the parties to the su