Chandrika Prasad Tiwari vs Prashant Tripathi

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(MP) 412

SANJAY DWIVEDI
Chandrika Prasad Tiwari – Appellant
Versus
Prashant Tripathi – Respondent

Advocates:
Vipin Yadav for petitioner; Dinesh Upadhyay for respondent No. 1; Naveen Dubey, Government Advocate for respondent No. 2/State.

ORDER

1. Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India questioning the validity of the order dated 7.1.2020 (Annexure P/4) passed in Civil Suit No. 51-A/2014 by XV Additional District Judge, Jabalpur

2. The facts of the case and the issue involved in the case lie in a narrow compass as would be clear from the narration of the facts stated infra:

3. The respondent No.1/plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of contract and alternatively for refund of amount paid at the time of execution of agreement to sale.

4. During pendency of suit, the documents, which are the foundation of claim i.e. agreements to sale dated 25.11.2011 and 30.6.2012, though got impounded by the plaintiff with the permission of the Court and thereafter an objection was raised by the defendant/petitioner about admissibility of the said documents saying that the said documents required to be registered as per the provisions of section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short ‘Act, 1908’) and if they are not registered those cannot be taken into evidence for any purpose even for collateral purpose. The trial court by order dated 7.1.2020 (Annexure P/4) has rejected the ob