IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU C.R.P.NO.904 OF 2009 Date:03.02.2011 Between:- Kottapalli Krishna Rao ..Petitioner/plaintiff And Konda Srinivasa Rao and another .. Respondents/defendants ORDER:- The Civil Revision Petition is directed against the docket order dated 04-02-2009 in O.S.No.66 of 2009 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Srikakulam, whereunder and whereby, the document, dated 03-11-2006, styled as a receipt for Rs.1,00,000/-, was impounded by the trial Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff contended that the trial Court has grossly erred in holding that the document in question is insufficiently stamped and in imposing a penalty of ten times the stamp duty. There cannot be any dispute that a document like the present one comes within the meaning of an ‘Instrument’ defined in Section 2(14) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for short, “the Act”), which reads thus: “Instrument:- “Instrument” includes every document by which any right or liability is, or purports to be, created, transferred, limited, extended, extinguished or recorded.” It is not disputed before this Court that the document impounded is an instrument within the meaning of Section 2(14) of the Act. If such is the case, it is liable for stamp duty and penalty. Under Section 35 of the Act, unless the stamp duty and penalty is paid, the document cannot be used for any purpose. Therefore, the trial Court rightly impounded the same. There are grounds to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _​_____________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 3rd February, 2011 AMD