THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.365 of 2010 ORDER: The respondent filed O.S.No.226 of 2007 in the Court of II Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad against the petitioner for the relief of specific performance of an agreement of sale, dated 27.04.2007. On receipt of summons in the suit, the petitioner filed I.A.No.862 of 2009 under Rule 11 of Order 7 C.P.C., with a prayer to reject the plaint. After hearing the petitioner and the respondent, the trial Court dismissed the I.A., through order dated 17.11.2009. Hence, this revision. Heard Sri R.A.Achuthanand, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.A.K.Mukheed, learned counsel for the respondent. The I.A was filed by raising two grounds viz., that there did not exist any cause of action for the respondent to file the suit and that the agreement of sale which constituted the basis for filing the suit, was not registered. So far as the first ground is concerned, the petitioner is not able to demonstrate as to how the suit is devoid of cause of action. The specific facts, that are said to have constituted the cause of action, were stated in the plaint. Even assuming that the respondent may not be able to prove them, the plaint does not become devoid of cause of action. For determining whether the suit is devoid of cause of action, the contents of the plaint have to be taken on their face value. It is only when the cause of action is not established even after the facts are taken on face value, that it can be rejected. Such is not the case here. Coming to the second ground, it is no doubt true that the A.P. State Legislature amended Section 17 of the Registration Act (for short ‘the Act’) by adding Clause (g) to sub-section (1) of Section 17, bringing the agreements of sale of immovable property of value extending Rs.100/- within the purview of that Section and thereby making such documents compulsorily registerable. However that does not make any difference for the operation of proviso to Section 49 of the Act. The proviso carves out exceptions as to the admissibility of unregistered documents viz., when they are filed for collateral purposes and in the context of relief of specific performance of that very agreement of sale. The trial Court has taken correct view of the matter. The civil revision petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 02.08.2010 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.365 of 2010 Date: 02.08.2010 JSU