IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE 6th DAY OF AUGUST, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3373 OF 2010 Between: P.Patabhiran Ramanujacharyulu and others … Petitioners And P.Pattabhiran Govindacharyulu and others … Respondents This Court made the following: HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3373 OF 2010 ORDER: - Petitioners/plaintiffs filed this revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the docket order, dated 02.07.2010, in O.S.No.61 of 2004, passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Kothapeta, wherein the receipt dated 07.07.1996 sought to be marked by the defendant acknowledging the receipt of 75 bags of paddy as Ex.B1, was permitted on payment of the stamp duty and penalty, overruling the objection of the plaintiffs that it requires registration. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the receipt dated 07.07.1996 acknowledging the receipt of 75 bags of paddy towards makhta clearly falls under Section 17(c) of the Registration Act, which is a compulsorily registerable document and the same cannot be permitted to be marked as an exhibit. The receipt do not either create any right, title, declaration or assignment, but the plaintiffs have only agreed to receive 75 bags of paddy and as per the agreement between the parties the plaintiffs received 75 bags of paddy and, therefore, the same do not require registration. In view of the same, over ruling the objection and marking the document as Ex.B1, subject to payment of stamp duty, does not call for any interference. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. However, it is fairly well settled that whether a document produced in the Court is admissible in evidence or not is a matter, which can be gone into at the time of trial by leading evidence. No costs. _______________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J 6th August 2010 lmv