An order admitting a document into evidence does not amount to a case decided, and therefore, no revision lies against such an order.

1. This petition for revision of the order of Shri S. N. Chadha, Sub-Judge 1st Class, Narnaul, dated 23.07.1976, admitting a disputed unregistered document into evidence and overruling the objection of the plaintiff-petitioner that it is not admissible in evidence for want of compulsory registration u/s. 17 of the Indian Registration Act, must fail on the short ground that no revision lies against such an order, as held by the Full Bench of the Lahore High Court in Bibi Gurdevi V/s. Mohammad Bakhsh, AIR 1943 Lah 65, in the following passage, quoted from the main judgment of Dalip Singh, J. (at p. 80) :-

"It seems clear to me that if a Court decides merely to summon a witness, or rejects or admits a document as evidence in the case, or postpones or adjourns the case, such an order cannot possibly be held to be a case decided."

No judgment to the contrary has been cited. For the reasons assigned above, I am unable to find my way to interfere with the order under revision at this stage. It will of course be open to any party to challenge the correctness of the order in first or second appellate proceedings, as the case may be. The petition is dismissed. The parties are left to bear their own costs.