MANNARU PENCHALAIAH Vs. PATNAM VENKAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS the question of fact and law involved in these two Civil Revision Petitions are one and the same, these matters are taken up together for disposal by this common order.

(2.) THESE Civil Revision Petitions are directed against two interlocutory applications filed in two different suits which are pending on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, nellore whereby the learned Junior Civil judge, refused to send the lease agreement dated 5. 12. 2001 to the Revenue Divisional officer for impounding it.

(3.) BRIEF facts are that the petitioner herein i. e. the plaintiff filed the suits against the respondents herein for grant of permanent injunction on the basis of a lease agreement dated 5. 12. 2001. According to the petitioner, the plaint schedule property originally belonged to the defendants, but by virtue of the lease agreement, he is in possession of the property. The suit is one for permanent injunction and to establish his possession of the property he is relying on the lease agreement and requested the Court to send the document to the Revenue Divisional officer for the purpose of impounding it, but the same was opposed by the respondents herein stating that once the lease deed is inadmissible in evidence and it requires the stamp duty and the petitioner is willing to pay the stamp duty, it is not necessary to send the document to the revenue Divisional Officer for the purpose of impounding it and the trial Court itself can accept the stamp duty and penalty and get the document impounded. The trial court, agreeing with the contention put forth by the respondents herein, dismissed the applications and the same are under challenge before this Court.