JUDGMENT

Alka Sarin, J. (Oral) - The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 31.05.2018 whereby on an application filed by the defendant-petitioner Nos.4 to 6 for deexhibiting the documents (Ex.P43 and Ex.P44), the Trial Court has passed an order holding that the objections regarding the admissibility would be decided at the final stage of the suit after leading of evidence by both the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the defendant-petitioners would contend that PW-5 Anil Jindal had tendered the documents in evidence and regarding the documents an objection was raised on the ground that the same were insufficiently stamped, late production, non-reliance, beyond pleadings, not existing and qua the mode of proof. Learned counsel has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Bipin Shantilal Panchal Vs. State of Gujarat & Anr. [2001 (3) SCC 1] to contend that all other objections regarding the admissibility can be decided at the final stage, however, the objection relating to deficiency of stamp duty of a document has to be decided before proceeding further.

3. Learned counsel for respondent No.1