THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED C.R.P.No.2948 of 2008 ORDER: This revision is preferred aggrieved by the docket order, dated 17.01.2008 passed by the Junior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam in Memo bearing G.R.No.8173/12-10-2007 in I.A.No.312 of 2007 in O.S. No. 61 of 2007. 2. The petitioners are the defendants. The respondent, who is plaintiff, filed the suit for permanent injunction against the defendants. The petitioners are claiming possession of the suit schedule property pertaining to portions bearing Nos.23-50-12 and 23-50-12/1, basing on document, namely, Stira Asthi Swadina Kriya Agreement to Kudina Irrevocable General Power of Attorney. The respondent filed the Memo not to admit the said document on the ground it is not duly stamped and the same was allowed. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the trial court ought to have seen that the admissibility of the document cannot be looked into while deciding the interlocutory application; that once the document is shown to have been registered, it is incumbent on the part of the trial court to receive the document into evidence; that the trial court ought not to have thrown out the document at the stage of interlocutory application and that if the document is not duly stamped, it should be sent to the District Collector for impounding. 4. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the record. The learned judge relying on the recitals of the document and the sale consideration referred to in it, came to the conclusion that it is a sale deed and it is hit by Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, as proper stamp duty has not been paid on the value of the property. Though the document is styled as Stira Asthi Swadina Kriya Agreement to Kudina Irrevocable General Power of Attorney, when the entire sale consideration was paid by the petitioners and possession was delivered to them, the document is to be construed as sale deed and the stamp duty has to be collected as per Section 47(A) of the Indian Stamp Act. Therefore, I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order so as to call for interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 5. Hence, the C.R.P. is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J 30.10.2009 Stp