IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRDESH:: HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT:: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.No.3467 OF 2010 Between: Borra Suryanarayana Reddy @ Suryanarayana …Petitioner A n d Borra Yerra Rao and two others ..Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.No.3467 OF 2010 ORDER: This civil revision petition is directed against the docket order dated 28-04-2010 in O.S.No.1070 of 2006, on the file of the V-Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, wherein the trial Court rejected the request of the plaintiff to mark the unregistered rectification deed as an exhibit in evidence. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the records. 3. The petitioner herein filed the suit against the respondents for declaration of title and permanent injunction in respect of the suit schedule property of Ac.0- 12 cents in Sy.No.5/14 situate in Nagarapupalem village. The defendant filed a written statement contesting the suit. When the matter came up for trial and the evidence of plaintiff as P.W.1 was in progress, the plaintiff sought to file a rectification deed and the defendants objected for marking of the same on the ground of want of registration. According to the plaintiff, the survey number of the land was wrongly mentioned by mistake in the sale deed Ex.A- 1 and, therefore, a rectification deed was executed duly mentioning the correct survey number. The plaintiff would contend that as the rectification deed does not convey any title as such in the property, the same does not require stamp duty or registration. 4. Admittedly, the survey number was wrongly mentioned in the original sale deed-Ex.A-1, which is a registered document. The original sale deed-Ex.A-1 purports to convey title in respect of the land situate in a particular survey number. By way of rectification deed, the survey number mentioned in Ex.A-1 was sought to be corrected by mentioning a different survey number. The purport and impact of the rectification deed is to convey title in respect of land mentioned in a different survey number, which is distinct from the survey number mentioned in Ex.A-1. In the absence of rectification, the original conveyance under Ex.A-1 would not have any meaning or purpose. It is only by virtue of the rectification deed that the title in respect of the land, which is subject matter of the sale transaction, is properly conveyed. The resort to execution of rectification deed is made only to ensure that the title in respect of the subject land is legally conveyed by making factually correct description of the land, as otherwise, the conveyance under Ex.A-1 sale deed is futile and the rectification deed seeks to inject life into Ex.A-1. When the original conveyance by Ex.A-1 was by way of registered deed, necessarily rectification thereof should also be by way of a registered deed, for the simple reason that the rectification deed seeks to correctly declare the rights in the immoveable property within the meaning of Section 17(1) of the Registration Act. 5. Rule 117 of the A.P. Rules under the Registration Act, 1908 reads as follows: “A rectification deed or a cancellation shall be registered in the same class of register book as that in which the original documents which it cancels or rectifies has been registered.” 6. The trial Court has, therefore, rightly upheld the objection against marking of the unregistered rectification deed on the ground of want of registration. The impugned order does not call for any interference. 7. In the result, the civil revision petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 23rd February, 2011 Lrkm.