ORDER :

A. Rajasekhar Reddy, J.

1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against docket order dated 11.09.2019 wherein and whereby the objection raised by the 1st respondent/plaintiff with regard to admissibility of documents for evidence captioned as 'No objection-cum-Declaration' was upheld by the Court below on the ground that the same is not stamped and registered.

2. Heard Sri A. Venkatachary, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Gaddam Srinivas, learned counsel for the 1st respondent/plaintiff.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are no definite properties mentioned in the 'No objection-cum-declaration' which is sought to be marked in evidence and it is incapable of valuation for the purpose of stamp duty and registration, as such, the same need not be stamped and registered. He also submits that the same can be marked for collateral purpose. In support of his contention, he relied on the judgments reported in T. Chakrapani v. K. Adimoolam, 2015 (1) CTC 359 and Bondar Singh v. Nihal Singh, AIR 2003 SC 1905.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for