IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4803 OF 2008 Between: Kodavatiganti Tirumala Charyulu and others .....PETITIONERS AND Smt. Kohamatla Naga Lakshmi and others ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4803 OF 2008 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order, 24.07.2008, in I.A.No.1351 of 2007 in O.S.No.237 of 2007, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Tadepalligudem, whereunder and whereby, the trial Court directed the petitioners herein to pay stamp duty and penalty for the document viz., Kahararunama dated 13.07.1989. 2. Heard. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the Kahararunama, dated 13.07.1989, can be construed as a deed of disclaimer, which does not require stamp duty and penalty. 4. Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for short, "the Act") specifies that 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. Once any instrument falls under the Schedule of the Act, it requires stamp duty. The document cannot be admitted in evidence for any purpose unless the stamp duty and penalty is paid. Therefore, the trial Court rightly held that the document viz., Kahararunama dated 13.07.1989 is liable for stamp duty and penalty. But, however, the trial Court has not given any finding, upon hearing both sides, as to which Article annexed to the Schedule of the Act, instrument in question would attract so as to ascertain the proper stamp duty. Therefore, while confirming the order of the trial Court, the trial Court is directed to send the document to the concerned revenue officials for ascertaining the proper stamp duty and penalty. 5. With the above observation, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. However, after duly ascertaining the required stamp duty and penalty for the said document, by the revenue officials, the trial Court is directed to decide whether this document falls under any one of the instruments as mentioned in the schedule annexed to the Act and thereafter, collect the stamp duty and penalty. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J September 30, 2010 MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4803 OF 2008 September 30, 2010