THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.2116 OF 2011 ORDER: This revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order, dated 25-04-2011 in O.S.No.09 of 2008 on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Kurnool at Nandyal. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The petitioner/plaintiff instituted Original Suit No.9 of 2008 on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Kurnool at Nandyal for declaration of title and permanent injunction, in respect of the plaint schedule property. During trial, when a photo copy of unregistered gift deed dated 15.03.1974 allegedly executed by father of the respondents/defendants, was sought to be marked on behalf of the defendants, the same was objected to by the plaintiff on the ground that the document in question was not executed by father of the defendants and no original document was filed and hence, it is not admissible in evidence. After hearing both sides, the trial court, vide impugned order, over-ruled the objection raised by the plaintiff and held that the document in question can be received in evidence subject to payment of stamp duty and penalty. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner herein contended that the respondents herein filed the written statement stating that under the document in question, father of the petitioner/plaintiff said to have conveyed the suit property under gift deed and on coming to know about the same, the respondents/defendants applied for a copy of the same invoking the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 by paying the requisite fee to the Municipality and the Municipality granted certified copy of the same. At this point of time, the relevancy and admissibility of the document in question cannot be tested. There cannot be any dispute that the document is in the nature of ‘instrument’ under Section 2 (14) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. In such a case, it requires stamp duty and penalty under Section 35 of the Act. Unless stamp duty and penalty is paid, the document cannot be used for any purpose by any person even for collateral purpose. Therefore, the trial Court rightly ordered to receive the document in question subject to payment of stamp duty and penalty. However, admissibility and relevancy of the document in question is left open and the petitioner is at liberty to raise such objection at the time of marking the document. 5. With the above observation, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ---------------------- K.C.BHANU, J. DATED: 05-08-2011 Hsd