CW-2613/06-Smt. Sakina & Ors. Vs. Abdul Sattar & Ors. Judgment dt.12.11.09 1/2 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2613/2006 Smt. Sakina & Ors. Vs. Abdul Sattar & Ors. Date of order : 12th November, 2009 PRESENT HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr. Manish Shishodia) for the petitioner Mr. Rajesh Parihar ) Mr. Ravi Bhansali for the respondents. ------- 1. Heard learned counsels. 2. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 25.4.2006 of the learned trial court whereby the learned trial court refused to mark as exhibit the mutual agreement (Sulahnama) between the parties in the present partition suit on the ground that the same was not registered as per Section 17 of the Act. 3. The present petitioners have challenged this order before this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 4. Having heard learned counsels and in view of the impugned order, this Court is of the opinion that the learned trial court has not given any reason much less cogent reason to hold that the document in question requires registration under Section 17 of the Act. It always depends upon the nature of the document whether it requires registration or not. 5. In the present case, if the document itself affects the partition between the parties then it may require registration under the CW-2613/06-Smt. Sakina & Ors. Vs. Abdul Sattar & Ors. Judgment dt.12.11.09 2/2 Act and if it is a memorandum of partition then such memorandum of partition does not require any registration. 6. The learned trial court has not discussed the nature of document at all in the impugned order, therefore, the conclusion drawn by learned trial court that it would require registration and, therefore, cannot be marked exhibit without registration 7. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 25.4.2006 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned trial court for decision afresh on this issue. No costs. [ DR. VINEET KOTHARI ], J. item No.13 babulal/