JUDGMENT :

1. The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 24.11.2017 passed by the learned trial Court in Civil Suit No. 84-A/13 whereby the learned Court has refused to mark the exhibit on the agreement to sell dated 6.9.2010 on the count that it is required to be registered, therefore, it cannot be exhibited under the provision of Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908.

2. Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the aforesaid order is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S. Kaladevi vs. B. R. Soma Sundaram, reported in 2010 (III) MPLJ 500 wherein, it has been held that a document required to be registered, if unregistered, can be admissible in evidence in a suit for specific performance for collateral purposes. He has again relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Court as reported in 2017 (III) MPLJ 97. It is alleged by the counsel for the petitioner that an application for impounding the document was also filed by him and he is ready to pay the remaining stamp duty and penalty as per the provisions contained under Section 35 of the Stamp Act but the trial Court without considering the aforesaid preposition has re