JUDGMENT 1. - In the course of the proceedings of the suit for eviction of the defendant-non-petitioner, the landlord-petitioner sought permission to tender the disputed rent note into evidence. The admission of the said rent note was objected to by the defendant-tenant on the ground that the same was not registered, though it was in respect of a lease for more than one year. On such objection the learned Trial Court heard the parties and accepted the objection raised by the defendant-tenant. Aggrieved by such orders the landlord-petitioner has approached this Court under Section 115 of the C.P.C. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. Mr. R.S. Mehta, the learned counsel for the defendant-tenant with Miss Ritu Sharma urged at the very out set that this Revision Petition under Section 115 is not maintainable for the obvious reason that it is against the interlocutory order pertaining to the admissibility of a document The learned counsel for the landlord-petitioner was fair enough to state that the impugned order certainly partains to the admissibility of a document and as such, may be stated to be an interlocutory order yet since by the impugned order the right of the landlord on to rely upon such evidence threatened there was no way out for him, but to approach this Court in revision. The grievance of the landlord-petitioner may be correct, but since the impugned order is an interlocutory order, pertaining simply to the admissibility of an evidence during the pendency of the suit proceedings, no revision under Section 115 C.P.C. is maintainable. The landlord-petitioner may at the final hearing of the suit advance such arguments before the learned Trial Court or in appeal, if such be the fate of the case, raise this pesuls support of his case in respect of the admissibility of the document in question. 3. In view of the above, this petition is dismissed with cost on parties.Revision dismissed. *******