1. This is a petition to revise the order of the Munsif - Magistrate, Secunderabad in O.S. No.31/1/1957 on his file holding that the document produced; by the plaintiff when he was deposing as P.W.1 in that suit was not admissible in evidence on the ground that it was 'an instrument of partition' and was not duly stamped and not, registered.

2. Two points have been argued before me by the learned Advocate for the plaintiff. They are as folows :
(a) that the document is not an 'instrument of partition' coming under S.2 (15) of the Indian Stamp Act ; and
(b) that, in any case, even if it is an instrument of partition, it is admissible in evidence for proving division in status.

3. (a) Point No.1: In Bapayya v. Ramakrishnayya , 1938-1 Mad. LJ 582 : (AIR 1938 Mad. 568) it was held by the Madras High Court that where unregistered partition lists are sought to be put in for the purpose of proving a partition between the parties the question which the court has to decide is whether those documents constituted the bargain between the parties or whether they were merely the record of an already completed transaction. Therein it was also held that the question in such a case was whether there w