NAGELLA SIVA KUMAR Vs. G SOWJANYA
LAWS(APH)-2019-7-14
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on July 15,2019

Nagella Siva Kumar Appellant
VERSUS
G Sowjanya Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

H.SIDDIQUI (DEAD) BY LRS VS. A.RAMALINGAM [REFERRED TO]
LAKKOJI MOHANA RAO VS. LAKKOJI VISWANADHAM [REFERRED TO]
BOGGAVARAPU NARASIMHULU VS. SRIRAM RAMANAIAH [REFERRED TO]
S. MOHAN KRISHAN VS. V. VARALAKSHMAMMA [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

T.RAJANI,J,. - (1.)This civil revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the order dated 24.8.2018, passed in I.A.No.298 of 2018 in O.S. No.56 of 2017 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Atmakur, by virtue of which the lower Court dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner-defendant, under Order XIII Rule 3 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), seeking to demark Ex.A.2-agreement of sale, which was allegedly executed by the petitioner in favour of the respondent-plaintiff. The suit is filed for permanent injunction.
(2.)Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the respondent.
(3.)The ground on which the counsel for petitioner assails the order is that the lower court ought to have not marked the document, as no collateral purpose exists in respect of the said document. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the agreement of sale does not contain any recital that possession of the property was delivered to the respondent. A perusal of the agreement of sale, no doubt, shows that there is no recital to the effect that the property was delivered to the respondent. But the lower court, somehow, considered that the document can be marked for proving collateral purpose. Be that as it may, the petition filed by the petitioner, in the lower court, is not maintainable under Order XIII Rule 3 CPC, as the said provision does not prescribe the procedure for demarking a document, which is already marked before the court. It only specifies that the Court may, at any stage of the suit, reject any document, which it considers irrelevant or otherwise inadmissible, recording the grounds of such rejection.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.