THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.3315 of 2011 ORDER: The respondent filed O.S.No.257 of 2010 in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kandukur, Prakasam District, against the petitioners, for the relief of injunction, in respect of the suit schedule property. He also filed I.A.No.2214 of 2010 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. Enquiry into it is in progress. The plea of the petitioners was that the suit schedule property was agreed to be sold in their favour by the respondent; that an agreement of sale, dated 03.04.2006, was executed, and possession was also delivered. An effort was made by them to file the agreement of sale into the Court. An objection was raised by the respondent, as to the admissibility of agreement of sale. Though the consideration for the property was mentioned as Rs.2,30,000/-, it was written on a stamp paper worth Rs.500/-. The trial Court sustained the objection and refused to receive the document through its order, dated 07.04.2011. Hence, this revision. Heard Sri M.Venkatanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioners. It is not in dispute that there is a recital in the agreement of sale relied upon by the petitioners that possession of the property was delivered. Explanation I to Article 47-A of Schedule I-A appended to Indian Stamp Act directed that wherever an agreement of sale refers to delivery of possession of the property, stamp duty shall be payable, as though it is a sale deed. A facility of adjusting the stamp duty at the time of execution of the sale deed, is provided. In the instant case, the stamp duty was not paid as required under law. The trial Court took note of the same and refused to receive the document. No exception can be taken to the same. The C.R.P. is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dt:24.08.2011 GJ