THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 499 OF 2009 ORDER: 1. This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed challenging the order dated 25.11.2008 in Original Suit No.151 of 2003 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Khammam. 2. None appears for the respondents inspite of service of notice. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. When document dated 29.6.2000 was sought to be marked by the petitioner/plaintiff during his evidence as P.W.1, learned counsel for the third defendant has taken objection for marking of the document on the ground that since it is a lease deed, it is a compulsorily registerable document. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that Ex.A1 document denotes ‘licence’ and therefore it does not require registration, and the observation of the trial court that it is inadmissible in evidence because it is unregistered, is untenable. 5. Whether the document dated 29.6.2000 sought to be marked as Ex.A,1 is a document denotes ‘licence’ or ‘lease’, has to be determined after the evidence is let in. Irrespective of the fact whether it denotes ‘licence’ or ‘lease’, when once it comes within the meaning of an ‘instrument’ under Section 2 (14) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for short, “Stamp Act”), it cannot be received in evidence unless stamp duty and penalty are paid as contemplated under Section 35 of the Stamp Act. Even an unregistered document can be used for collateral purpose as required under proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908. So, stamp duty and penalty have to be paid on the document sought to be marked to receive the same in evidence. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and is, accordingly, set aside. The trial court is directed to impound the document to collect requisite stamp duty and penalty and decide whether it denotes ‘licence’ or ‘lease’, in accordance with law with reference to the other evidence. 6. With the above observation, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. No costs. --------------------- (K.C.Bhanu, J.) 10.2.2011 DRK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 499 OF 2009 10.2.2011 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 499 OF 2009 10.2.2011 Between: Anandesi Balaiah …Petitioner And Fishermen Co-operative Society, Khammam & ohters …Respondents