APHC010215522026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3206] FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1396/2026 Between: 1. MANCHA PRASAD RAO, S/O VEERA NAGULU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O SOLASA VILLAGE, EDLAPADU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. MANCHA VENKATRAO,, S/O VENKATESWARLU,AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O SOLASA VILLAGE,EDLAPADU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. MANCHA KRISHNA RAO, S/O VENKAIAH(ADOPTED), AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O SOLASA VILLAGE, EDLAPADU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT 522002 2. MANCHA SAMBRAJYAM, W/O SAMBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 3. MANCHA HANUMAN, S/O SAMBAIAH,AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 4. MANCHA VENKATESWRALU, S/O SAMBAIAH, AGED ABOUT43 YEARS, 5. MANCHA RAMESH, S/O SAMBAIAH, AGE,,D ABOUT 40 YEARS, 6. PATHIKONDA SRINIVASA RAO, S/O VENKATESWARLU AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 7. KURANGI PEDA VENKATESWARARAO, S/O SUBBAIAH, AGED 2 RRR, J C.R.P.No.1396 of 2026 ABOUT 55 YEARS, 8. MAKA CHINA VENKATESWARLU, S/O BUDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, 9. MAKA VENKATESWARLU, S/O BRAHMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, 10. MAKA GOVIND, S/O BRAHMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, 11. MAKA SRINIVASA RAO, S/O BRAHMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESPONDENTS 2 TO 11 ARE RESIDENTS OF SOLASA VILLAGE, EDLAPADU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT RESPONDENTS 2 TO 11 ARE NOT NECESSARY PARTIES IN THIS REVISION PETITION. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased tobeg to present this Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition against orders dated 04-02-2026 made in I.A No. 432/2025 I in O.S No. 46/2021 on the file of the court of Additional Civil Judge(Senior Division), Narasaraopeta, Guntur district AND PASS IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in pursuance of order dated 04-02-2026 made in I.A No. 432/2025 in O.S.No. 46/2021 on the file of the court of Additional Civil Judge(Senior Division), Narasaraopeta, Guntur district AND PASS Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. G V S MEHAR KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. 3 RRR, J C.R.P.No.1396 of 2026 The Court made the following Order: The petitioners herein had filed I.A.No.432 of 2025 in O.S.No.46 of 2021 before the learned Additional Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Narasaraopet, Guntur District, for the Court to receive an unregistered partition deed, for a collateral purpose. 2. The Trial Court disposed of this application, by an order, dated 04.02.2026, with the following directions: 15. In the result, petition is allowed by considering the both sides arguments in the result, petition is allowed with the following conditions: 1) An unregistered partition deed/list is impounded and the party has to appear before Sub Registrar Office in order to pay the penalty as stated by the Sub-Registrar, thereafter, the said document will be received as evidence for collateral purpose only. 2) The counsel is directed to obtain the certified copy of this unmarked document and file it the same in the court for future safety. 3) The office is directed to send the unregistered partition deed/list to Sub registrar office on payment of process in order to collect penalty and the Sub registrar, after collecting penalty has to resend the same to this court. 3. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner has filed the present Civil Revision Petition. 4 RRR, J C.R.P.No.1396 of 2026 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has taken this Court through the said Judgment. The Trial Court observed that an unregistered document would not be admissible, on account of the bar under Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908. However, the Trial Court also observed that such an unregistered document which requires compulsory registration under Section 27 (1) can still be received as evidence for collateral purpose. Apart from this, the Trial Court also observed that where the document is unregistered, the same can be admitted for collateral purpose on payment of penalty. On the question of stamp duty, the Trial Court also observed that improperly stamped documents can be impounded for clearing such a defect, upon payment of requisite stamp duty and penalty. 5. The view of the Trial Court that penalty is payable for admitting any unregistered document for collateral purpose does not appear to be correct. However, the observation of the Trial Court that improperly stamped duty is a defect which is cleared by payment of penalty and deficit stamp duty in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act. 6. Another aspect that needs to be observed is that the Trial Court did not give any finding as to whether the contention of the petitioner that the document is sought to be marked for collateral purpose is correct or not. In any event, that issue would come up only when the document is present when being marked as an exhibit and the other side takes an objection for such marking. This issue would not arise at the stage of receiving the document. 5 RRR, J C.R.P.No.1396 of 2026 7. For all the aforesaid reasons, the present Civil Revision Petition is disposed, by affirming the directions of the Trial Court set out above. However, it is further clarified that marking of such document would be subject to the objections taken up before the Trial Court for the purpose for which document is being marked as a collateral purpose. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J Date:08.05.2026 MJA 6 RRR, J C.R.P.No.1396 of 2026 151 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1396/2026 08.05.2026 MJA