SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 5812

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
T.R.RAVI, J
M/S BISMI CASHEW COMPANY A PARTNERSHIP FIRM, MANGADU , KOLLAM – Appellant
Versus
L.GEETHAKUMARI W/O LATE BALACHANDRAN PILLAI – Respondent
OP(C) NO. 250 OF 2025|CS NO.37 OF 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.ARUN BABU, SHRI.ANEESHRAJ R., SHRI.G.HARIPRASAD
For the Respondents: SHRI.B.MOHANLAL, SMT.P.S.PREETHA, SHRI.ASWIN V. NAIR, SHRI.KARTHIK J SEKAR, SHRI.ABIJITH M., SMT.AVANI NAIR, SMT.JAYAPRABHA ARJUN, SMT.PRAVEENA T.

Unregistered lease deeds can be admissible for collateral purposes if adequately demonstrated, contrary to lower court's decision.

Headnote:The court examined the admissibility of certain unregistered lease deeds presented for collateral purposes, determining that the lower court's refusal to admit them was erroneous. The court emphasized that collateral purposes were adequately demonstrated, thus setting aside the lower court’s order and directing it to allow the marking of documents accordingly. The court also requested timely consideration of an application for lifting attachments.

Table of Content
1. challenge to admission of unregistered lease deeds (Para 1)
2. collateral purposes for document admission established (Para 2)
3. instruction for fresh orders on document marking (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

This Original Petition has been filed challenging Ext.P8 order, whereby the court below has ordered that document Nos. 4 and 15 cannot be admitted in evidence as they are not registered. It is also stated in the order that the plaintiff could not show for what collateral purpose the documents need to be marked. The documents in question purport to be lease deeds. But since they are leases executed for period beyond one year, they can be legally accepted as evidence of lease, only if they are registered. Admittedly, the documents are not registered.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the documents can still be admitted for the purpose of proving the collateral purpose regarding the payment of advance money. The above submission is legally sound. The court below has said that the plaintiff could not show for what collateral purpose the documents are to be marked. Since the collateral purpose is clearly mentioned, I do not think that the said reasoning can be sustained.

3. In the result, Ext.P8 is set aside. The court below may pass fresh orders permitting the marking of documents for proving the collateral purpose regarding payment of advance money and proceed in accordance with law.

The respondents have filed an application seeking early disposal of an application seeking to lift the attachment. The court below shall consider the same and pass necessary orders at the earliest, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top