THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.569 OF 2011 28.09.2011 Between: Desalanka Suryanarayana …Petitioner AND Gollapalli Venkatalakshmi …Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.569 OF 2011 ORDER: The respondent instituted O.S.No.246 of 2003 for perpetual injunction. The petitioner who is none other than the brother of the plaintiff filed the written statement in 2004. It appears the suit was dismissed for default in 2009 and the same was restored subsequently. Thereafter the petitioner filed I.A.No.790 of 2010 under Order VII Rule 14(1) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 praying the Court to condone the delay in filing eight documents. The same was opposed by the respondents. On considering the rival contentions, the Court below by order dated 20.01.2011 dismissed I.A.No.790 of 2010, aggrieved by which, present civil revision petition is filed. The counsel for petitioner/defendant submits that the application was indeed filed under Order VIII Rule 1A(3) of CPC, at the time of considering such application, the Court below ought to have seen that the documents sought to be filed are relevant and crucial and the Court has to take a proper view and allow the application. These contentions are refuted by other side. There is no dispute that the petitioner sought to file additional documents after lapse of seven years of filing the suit. In support of his application, he stated that the documents were in custody of his sister, and that his brother-in-law was sick and as such, the documents could not be filed at the time of filing written statement. The affidavit averments are very vague and did not even remotely suggest or allege the importance of these documents. Further, as rightly pointed out by the counsel for respondent/plaintiff one of the documents which was sought to be filed is an unregistered gift deed dated 07.03.1991 allegedly executed by D.Chantamma @ Chkramma and R.Surya Rao executed in favour of plaintiff. Being an unregistered document, the Court can always refuse to receive it even in an injunction suit. Therefore, the impugned order does not suffer from any error apparent on the face of record. The civil revision is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 28.09.2011 Pln