IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2246 OF 2011 Date:09.08.2011 Between:- G.Venkateswarlu .. Petitioner/Plaintiff And M.Swamy Devi .. Respondent/defendant ORDER: The Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India is directed against the order, dated 15.04.2011, in O.S.No.613 of 2009 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kurnool whereunder and whereby, the unregistered simple mortgage deed, dated 17.03.2008, executed by the father of the respondent/defendant by name M.Swamy in favour of the petitioner/plaintiff was ordered to be marked by the petitioner as an exhibit for collateral purpose on payment of stamp duty and penalty. 2. The petitioner herein filed O.S.No.613 of 2009 against the respondent/defendant on the foot of an unregistered suit document, viz., mortgage deed, dated 17.03.2008, executed by the father of the respondent in his favour, for recovery of the suit amount with subsequent interest and costs. When the suit document was tendered for marking as an exhibit, the counsel for the respondent took an objection as to the admissibility of the document. The said document was ordered to be marked as an exhibit for collateral purpose but on payment of stamp duty and penalty. Hence, the Revision Petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the document is not a simple mortgage deed and that the petitioner is not liable to pay stamp duty and penalty and hence, he prays to set aside the impugned order. 4. When a document is creating or extinguishing a right in immovable property, it is an ‘instrument’ within the meaning of Section 2(14) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for short, ‘the Act’). Admittedly, stamp duty and penalty have not been paid on the document in question. Under Section 35 of the Act, no instrument chargeable with duty shall be admitted in evidence for any purpose by any person unless such instrument is duly stamped. Even in case of the document, which is compulsorily registerable under Section 17(1) (b) of the Registration Act, 1908 but is not registered, it can be used for collateral purpose, as provided under proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act. But, such stage would not come in this case in view of the fact that under Section 35 of the Act, no instrument chargeable with duty shall be admitted in evidence for any purpose by any person unless such instrument is duly stamped. Therefore, the trial Court rightly ordered to receive the document subject to payment of stamp duty and penalty. The stamp duty has to be ascertained by the concerned revenue officials. Hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned order and the C.R.P. is liable to be dismissed. 5. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. However, the learned Judge shall refer the document in question to the revenue officials for the purpose of determining the stamp duty and penalty payable by the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 09th August, 2011. AMD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2246 OF 2011 Date:09.08.2011 AMD