JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioners are aggrieved against the order dated 27.2.2001 by which the trial Court ordered that document in dispute may exhibited subject to objection. The objection of the petitioners against admitting the document in evidence was on two counts; one is the document is not registered and second is the document is not executed in proper value of the stamps. 3. Learned counsel or the petitioners submits that in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of B.S. Panchal v. State of Gujarat, reported in 2001(1) RLW 169 (SC) wherein it has been held that the Court is required to determine first the objection relates to deficiency of stamp duty of a document. In view of the above decision, the trial Court is, therefore, directed to decide whether the document in dispute can be executed on proper stamps or not If not whether the document can be admitted in evidence after recovering the penalty for deficiency of stamps on the document or not and thereafter, may. proceed. It is made clear that objection regarding requirement of registration is no more under challenge by the petitioner, therefore, only questions before the trial Court is with respect to the objection regarding deficiency on the stamp duty on the document in dispute. 4. In view of the above reasons, the revision petition of the petitioner is allowed and the trial Court is directed to determine first the objection of deficiency of stamps on the document in dispute before proceeding in the suit. *******