THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4998 of 2010 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the first defendant in O.S.No.317 of 2004 on the file of the learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangal. The petitioner herein has filed I.A.No.1090 of 2010 in O.S.No.317 of 2004, seeking permission to recall D.W.1, whose evidence was closed on 20.07.2010 for the purpose of marking rectification deed, dated 11.12.1998. The aforesaid suit was filed by respondents 1 and 2 herein for injunction simplicitor, written statement was filed by the first defendant and evidence was also recorded. As per the averments mentioned in the written statement, it is the case of the petitioner that his vendor’s vendor, by name, Ms.Padmavathi, purchased the property from Alluri Murthy Raju under an unregistered sale deed. It is also his case that there were some mistakes with regard to boundaries in the said unregistered sale deed executed by Alluri Murthy Raju, and subsequently, the same was rectified by rectification deed, dated 11.12.1998. In this case, it is to be noticed that neither Alluri Murthy Raju nor Ms.Padmavathi, who is the petitioner’s vendor’s vendor, is a party to the suit. It is not in dispute that the rectification deed is an unregistered one. As much as there was no pleading by the petitioner in the written statement with regard to the said rectification deed, and in the absence of registration of the said document, it is not permissible to allow the same as evidence in the suit. In view of the reasons recorded by the trial Court, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order warranting interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The Civil Revision Petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 14th OCTOBER, 2011. kvni