THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 6237 of 2009 ORDER : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. None appears for the respondents inspite of listing the matter under the caption ‘for dismissal’. 2. This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order dated 27.11.2009 in Original Suit No.2 of 2009 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Atmakur, Kurnool district, whereunder and whereby a document, which is styled as a ‘partition agreement’ dated 26.12.2005, filed by the petitioners/defendants was held to be inadmissible in evidence as hit by Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that, in view of the proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908 even though a document is compulsorily registerable but not registered, it can be used for collateral purpose, and that the petitioners are ready to pay stamp duty and penalty as required under Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, and hence, he prays to set aside the impugned order. 4. Section 35 (a) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 reads thus: “Instruments not duly stamped inadmissible in evidence, etc.:- No instrument chargeable with duty shall be admitted in evidence for any purpose by any person having by law or consent of parties authority to receive evidence, or shall be acted upon, registered or authenticated by any such person or by any public officer, unless such instrument is duly stamped:” The above provision is very clear that an instrument chargeable with duty cannot be admitted in evidence for any purpose. Unless stamp duty is paid on an instrument, question of using for collateral purpose as per proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908 may not arise. 5. The document in question is a partition agreement. If that document falls as an ‘instrument’ within the meaning of Section 2(14) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, it requires stamp duty under Section 35 (a) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. In such a case, the party who wants to receive the document in evidence as an instrument, has to pay stamp duty and penalty. No doubt, when a document requires registration under any one of the clauses under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908, and still it has not been registered, it can be used for collateral purpose in view of the proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908. By nature of this document, it is clear that a right is being created on the persons who executed the same. Therefore, it is an instrument coming under the definition of Section 2(14) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. So, the trial Court ought to have received the document into evidence after impounding the document i.e. after paying of stamp duty and penalty under Section 35 of the Stamp Act, 1899. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 6. The Civil Revision Petition is, accordingly, allowed, setting aside the impugned order. The document viz. partition agreement dated 26.12.2005, is directed to be received subject to payment of stamp duty and penalty as required under Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. Thereafter, it can be used in evidence for collateral purpose in terms of proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908. --------------------- (K.C.Bhanu, J.) 23.11.2010 DRK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 6237 of 2009 23.11.2010 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 6237 of 2009 23.11.2010 Between: Venna Venkata Swamy Reddy & others …Petitioners And Smt. Venna Lakshmidevi & another …Respondents