M. SEETHARAMA MURTI, J.

1. In this revision, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India filed by the plaintiffs, the challenge is to the order, dated 4.1.2019, of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Pithapuram, whereby the learned Judge, while upholding the objection of the defendants, held that the document, dated 8.12.1956, is a partition deed and hence, the same is liable to be charged with stamp duty and penalty and that it cannot be admitted in evidence, even for collateral purposes, unless stamp duty and penalty are paid and collected.

2. I have heard the submissions of Sri S. Subba Reddy, learned Counsel appearing for the revision petitioners-plaintiffs ('plaintiffs', for brevity) and, of Sri N. Siva Reddy, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-defendants ('defendants', for brevity). I have perused the material record.

3. The introductory facts, in brief, are as follows:-'The plaintiffs instituted the suit against the defendants for a perpetual injunction in respect of agricultural land with Mango garden of an extent of Acs. 6.34 cents in Thammayyapeta Bendapudi Gram Panchayat, Thondangi Mandal, East Godavari District morefully described in the schedule annexed to