IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 2502 of 2009 Date of decision: 4.05.2009. Smt. Indira Petitioner Versus Vicky ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr. Sandeep Chhabra, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** S.D.ANAND, J. It is apparent from the impugned order that the only amendment allowed by the learned Trial Court is in the caption of the relevant document which had initially been described as 'partnership deed' and which has presently been allowed to be described as 'Sharyatnama'. No change in any other part of the document had been allowed. The mere change of caption of the document would not have any effect at all upon the contents of the document. The nature of document would be evident from a perusal of the document itself and the mere change of caption has no bearing upon the nature of the document. For example, if a document is captioned as a partnership deed but it actually happens to be a rent note, the mere description thereof as a partnership deed would not entitle it to the latter nomenclature. This aspect shall, obviously, be kept by the learned Trial court in view while appreciating the evidence at the time of arguments before that Court. The petition is devoid of force and is ordered to be dismissed. May 04, 2009 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge