ORDER : T. Rajani, J. 1. This revision is filed, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, by the petitioner/respondent, questioning the order, dated 4.8.2016, passed in IA No. 172 of 2016 in OS No. 210 of 2014, by virtue of which the lower Court allowed the petition, which was filed by the petitioner, seeking to receive the partition list dated 16.5.1992 and also a gift deed dated 22.1.2005. 2. Heard Sri Rajabhogendranath, Counsel for the petitioner, and Sri V. Venugopala Rao, Counsel for the respondents. 3. By the impugned order, the Court below, considering that though the documents are not registered documents, they can be looked into for collateral purposes allowed the petition. While doing so, the Court relied on the judgment of the Kakkarla Vijaya and others v. Kakkarla Venkataiah, 1999 (6) ALD 642 . 4. The judgment, which was relied upon by the Counsel for the respondent therein reported in Bolleddula Lakshmi Devi v. Bolleddula Papanna and others, 2003 (3) ALD 50 : 2003 (3) ALT 513 , was also considered, wherein it was held that an unregistered partition deed cannot be looked into even for collateral purposes. But the Court by relying on the judgment reported in Khaja Habeebuddin v. Md. Ibrahim and others, 2004 (4) ALD 84 : 2004 (3) ALT 51 , which held that unregistered partition deed can be received in evidence for collateral purpose for severance of status and nothing more allowed the petition. The Court below also relied on the judgment reported in G. Narayana Reddy v. P. Narayana Reddy, 2016 (3) ALT 12 , wherein it was held that an invalid Gift Deed can be looked into as explaining the nature and character of possession thenceforth, and the recital can be used as evidence of Gift having made under the provisions of 91 of Indian Evidence Act. The judgment of the Apex Court reported in Padma Vithaba Chakkayya v. Md. Multami, AIR 1963 SC 70 , was to the effect that an unregistered gift deed, which is not legally admissible as evidence, can be used as evidence to show the character of possession. 5. In this case, the documents are sought to be received as evidence to prove the factum of possession and severance of status, which in the light of the above judgments can be considered as collateral purposes. 5. In this case, the documents are sought to be received as evidence to prove the factum of possession and severance of status, which in the light of the above judgments can be considered as collateral purposes. The judgment relied upon by the Counsel for the petitioner, which is reported in Kale and others v. Deputy Director of Consolidation and others, AIR 1976 SC 807 , is only to the effect that the family arrangement by which the property is equitably divided between the various contenders so as to achieve an equal distribution of wealth is to be registered. The other judgment relied upon is reported in M. Vidyasagar Reddy v. M. Padmamma, 2016 (4) ALD 775 (DB) : 2016 (3) LURCC 99, is also to the same effect, to say that if a document is a deed of partition, there is no other alternative except to get the document registered. 6. The above two judgments touch upon the aspect of registration of a document. At present, the issue involved is whether a document, which is compulsorily registrable and not registered, can be received and marked in evidence to prove collateral purpose. The rulings relied upon by the lower Court to hold that the document even if it is unregistered can be relied upon for proving collateral purpose hold good for the gift deed, which requires signatures of two witnesses and which contains attestation of only one witness as it too can be looked into for collateral purpose. 7. With the above observations, the civil revision petition is dismissed. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.