O R D E R

When the matter came up on 04.04.2022, it was reported that the revision petitioner died and therefore, the civil revision petition was dismissed as infructuous. Before signing the order, there was a doubt as to the death of the petitioner and therefore, it was directed to verify the death of the petitioner and the stage of the suit and it was found that the petitioner was alive and therefore, the matter was listed for clarification on 08.11.2022. On 08.11.2022, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner would state that the petitioner was very much alive and therefore the order dated 04.04.2022 was recalled. After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for petitioner, the following order is passed:-

2. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the fair order and decreetal order passed in I.A.No.1356 of 2014 in O.S.No.284 of 2009 on the file of Learned District Munsif, at Tambaram dated 07.04.2015 and permit the petitioner to pay stamp duty penalty for the Koorchit dated 11.02.2000 and admit the Koorchit for adjudication.

3. Brief facts of the case are as follows:-

(i)The petitioner is the plaintiff and he filed a suit is O.S.No.284 of 2009 before the Court of District Munsif, Tambaram, seeking for declaration. In the said suit, the petitioner has marked the Koor Chit, dated 11.02.2000, as an exhibit. Hence, the first respondent herein/first defendant has filed an application in I.A.No.548 of 2011 to reject the Koor Chit stating that Koor Chit is not an admissible evidence and the same cannot be marked as an exhibit in the suit. The trial Court had dismissed the said application. Aggrieved by the said order, C.R.P.(PD) No.3436 of 2011 came to be filed by the first respondent herein/1st defendant and the same was allowed vide order, dated

06.08.2014.

(ii) In the meanwhile, the petitioner filed an application in I.A.No.1356 of 2014 seeking to permit him to pay the stamp duty penalty for the Koor Chit, dated 11.02.2000 and admit the Koor Chit on file for proper adjudication of the case. The said application came to be dismissed vide order, dated 07.04.2015. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has filed the present Civil Revision Petition.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the or-

der, dated 06.08.201 passed in C.R.P.(PD) No.3436 of 2011.

5. It is pertinent to point out herein that in the suit in O.S.No.284 of

2009, earlier I.A.No.548 of 2011 has been filed praying to reject the koorchit from marking as an exhibit in the suit. The said I.A., has been dismissed. Against the dismissal of the said I.A., CRP.No.3436 of 2011 has been filed before this court. This court, after elaborately going through the entire records, observed as under:-

“ 13......As per the averments in Ex.P.3 Koor Chit it-

self, it was stated that except the property settled in favour of the first defendant, the other three brothers were divided the property. Since they want to obtain separate title over the property, they divided the property as three portions viz., A Schedule property was alloted to Damodaran, B Schedule property was allotted to Perumal/plaintiff and C Schedule property was allotted to Chakrapani. So it reveals that on the basis of the Koor Chit, they divided the property and took possession. So the Koor Chit must be properly stamped and it need registration. Therefore, the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the respondent that to record the past division, Ex.P.3 came into existence, does not merit ac-

ceptance.

Considering the aforestated circumstances, I am of the view, Koor Chit requires registration and it must be incor- porated in a proper stamp paper. Once the document has been marked without any objection, the admissibility of the document can be decided at later stage as per the dictum of the Apex Court in Bipin Shantilal Panchal Vs. State of Gu- jarat and another reported in 2001 (3) SCC page 1, since the plaintiff has not sought for impounding of document fo